5 thoughts on “Inwood Seeing New City Programs and Developer Interest 1 Year After Rezoning

  1. So much is false, misleading, or overblown about the City’s so-called commitments and the Council Member’s claims that it’s hard to know where to begin. Here are just a few:
    – HPD’s goal to preserve & protect 2,500 current affordable homes is totally unachievable. It would require the City to increase its preservation success rate by 389% uptown. The few new unproven HPD tools may yield a small uptick in success–10% maybe–but promising a goal requiring increasing success by 389% is ridiculous.
    – The modest commercial lease protections will only be in new buildings and, at that, just those few that get over $2 million in City subsidies. So the few businesses that benefit will be new businesses entering Inwood paying higher starting rents. Small businesses in existing buildings won’t benefit at all. So, good-bye local merchants we’re familiar with. Hello Burger King.
    – Tens of millions of dollars of City commitments are not even slated for Inwood. For example, nice that Highbridge Park is getting improved, but it’s south of Inwood. Most schools getting new programs are not in Inwood. And as note in the article, no new school seats! This despite at least 13,000 new residents expected.
    – The math is very clear on MIH in Inwood. Most of the so-called “affordable” apartments will be too expensive for over half of Inwood residents. Duh! That’s the very population most likely to be severely housing cost-burdened and at high risk of homelessness. Why not target most “affordable” apartments for them, rather than for wealthier households? The City has affordability backwards.
    And I could go on and on. The promises made are either unachievable, underwhelming, or untrue, and certainly not worth the very real risk of residential and small business displacement and environmental damage.

  2. Oh, and let’s also remind everyone that the library project also predated the rezoning but was wrapped into it because the spot upzoning the city was pushing would have been completely illegal without the guide of neighborhood rezoning to shield it. It was never necessary, since housing could have been developed on the site without upzoning, similar to Sunset Park Library, but elected officials were a) gullible b) naive and c) didn’t really understand zoning or redevelopment so when the mayor pushed to make the site 17 stories instead of 9 they rolled over.

    But again, it had nothing to do with the rezoning and sticks out like a sore thumb on the zoning map (and soon in reality, given that it is more than twice the height of anything within several blocks of it.)

  3. Pingback: Inwood Seeing New City Programs and Developer Interest 1 Year After Rezoning – City Limits – IAM Network

  4. “Northern Manhattan Is Not For Sale, a coalition of community groups and Inwood residents who were against the rezoning, feared the rezoning would attract market-rate housing and further gentrify their community”. “Realized” instead of “feared”. “Feared” continues the erroneous DeBlasio trope that Inwood residents are ignorant & fearful.

    Both 112 Seaman Avenue and 204 Hillside Avenue are within the R7A zoning and were coming, rezoning or no rezoning.
    ” A couple of weeks after the rezoning was approved last year, permits were also filed for a 30-story mixed-use commercial and residential building on the waterfront property 3875 9th Avenue, which is slated to create 614 units with 25 percent of them set aside as affordable housing, as well as commercial and/or retail space.” This is what the majority of Inwood residents remain opposed to. Uptown United’s alternative plan would have produced an equal number of housing units by retaining an R7A zoning east to the Harlem river.

    4650 Broadway is the ALBERT KAHN, designed Packard Uptown Sales and Service building Shamefully, it is slated for demolition while elsewhere the NYCEDC solicits Requests for Proposals for an Immigrant Research and Performing Arts Center. The “greenest” option would be to re-purpose Inwood’s Packard building. Residents and preservationists are interested to know how 272 units may be built with the current zoning at that site?

    Inwood Library, a much loved and well used library was completed in 1952 to an earlier design and to post-war library best practices. It is harmonious to Inwood’s early 20th century built environment. The proposal that a replacement library of equal value can be provided in two years for $10 million is a joke at the expense of Inwood residents. Again the “green” option would be repair not demolition of our library.
    The “Eliza” should be built on one of the City-owned plots of land east of Tenth Avenue; all the new residents in the 30 story towers of east Inwood will need a library, pre-K and community center.
    The size of the proposed interim library is insulting to Inwood residents. How will that small space accommodate all the people who currently use the library for reading, programs, as a safe after-school space or cooling center? It is impossible.
    ” There will be additional mobile library services available outside the relocation space.” Inwood residents were promised we would not be reduced to a book mobile.

    NYCEDC is an appointed body in service to the REBNY-controlled City Government and Mayor.
    All of the NYCEDC remedies are attempts to patch with bandaids, the mortal wound of rezoning inflicted by the very same NYCEDC.

    The Dyckman Green gym was part of the Participatory Budget 2015 and nothing to do with rezoning. Neither 175th Street Recreation Area nor Wallenberg Playground are in Inwood and again nothing to do with rezoning.

    ” The $30 million construction on Highbridge Park” is part of Mayor DeBlasio’s $150 million for 5 neglected parks, one in each borough, dating from 2016, awarded prior to rezoning and again this Park is not in Inwood and has nothing to do with the rezoning.

    The Anne Loftus playground rehab is not in the rezoning area. Anyone who was paying any attention to the rezoning knows that most Inwood residents, who cared about the rezoning, wanted all Inwood i.e. to it southern boundary per WPA, at 190th street and Hillside Avenue where the north -south street grid veers east – west and the land dips from the Heights into Inwood valley, to be protected with R7A zoning. The “deaf” NYCEDC would not listen and this section of Inwood, including the Anne Loftus playground was excluded from the area to be re-zoned .

    The historic Highbridge Water Tower restoration will start next month, at an expected cost of between $3-5 million: Again this is not in Inwood and nothing to do with rezoning.

    Workforce 1 Career Center at 181st Street is in Washington Heights not Inwood.

    Dyckman Houses were excluded from the proposed area to be rezoned so the residents have had little or no input into this proposal to build in and around their housing development.

    “The sanitation garage at West 215th Street and 10th Avenue to facilitate the creation of affordable housing. At the time of the agreement, the city had said once the garage was relocated to the Brookdale site in Kips Bay (25-26th Streets, between First Avenue and the FDR Drive) then the city could start planning for affordable housing development project on that site.” What of the Northern Manhattan Community land trust? Will Kips Bay take the garbage?

    “Rodriguez, who started as a community organizer, says he has watched his district’s infrastructure deteriorate since the 80s. He says the goal of the rezoning was to get those capital investments back into the community. “In my vision it, I do believe that economic development that we can bring to our community should be around technology and a Latino food destination,” he says.” Unfortunately, most of the investment will not be coming to Inwood, it is headed to Washington Heights. Washington Heights deserves this long overdue investment but not at the expense of Inwood’’s continued livability for all residents, through a rushed and community-excluded rezoning.,

    I don’t know what our Council Member was promised if he voted for this rezoning, Speaker of the Council? MTA commissioner? We, Inwood residents know he was not thinking of our welfare.

    We await the judgement in the Inwood Legal Action Article 78 law suit.

    Thank you.

Leave a Reply

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