May

27

Quick AdHoc

Written by


Bwog’s back from our Memorial Day sojourn, and we hope you had as lovely a weekend as we did. Here now, the Spring 2008 issue of
AdHoc, distilled for your reading pleasure. 

The Tibet Question, Answer

The CSER Beginnings, Future

The Manhattanville Question, Answer, Beginnings, and Future

Patrick Cockburn’s Muqtada Read, Reviewed

Birth Control Control

It’s All in the Game

Tags: , , ,

7 Comments

  1. hey bwog

    just to give you a heads up

    Columbia will play 1 seed Coastal Carolina to open up the ncaa baseball tourney

    and Henry Perkins (CC Senior) won ivy player of the year!
    http://www.columbiaspectator.com/node/55132

    Congrats to Henry. That's My Mama.

  2. one thing

    i don't get

    http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/P/Henry-Perkins.shtml

    is why he and columbia players in general are listed from barnard college

  3. pro manhattanville

    the manhattanville article is somewhat infuriating.

    -manhattanville is not made up of industrial sector jobs, rather, they are made up of storage facilities (which feed off of the columbia students anyways), gas stations, mechanics/chop shops. I would not consider any of these businesses a vital manufacturing enterprise. if by "industrial" you mean blue collar, perhaps, but certainly not industrial sector.

    -i was under the impression columbia already had control of 85% of the land in manhattanville, as opposed to 65% of it.

    -building is a way of life in NYC. the justification for building in manhattanville is that columbia is building and is even offering a compensation package--not some luxury real estate developer! real estate in NYC is always a big issue, and no matter where you go there will always be someone clamoring for the other to get out. especially if there is a lucrative opportunity. in this case, it's nick sprayregen and his henchmen clamoring for columbia to get out because we're taking his valuable luxury condominium development land.

    -which other schools even offer a community benefits agreement to their community anyways? Harvard and Penn are following in COLUMBIA's footsteps for their respective expansions.

    -it only makes sense that the benefits agreement is back weighted to offer more in the later years. it allows columbia to use the time value of money to raise the funds it needs in this EXPENSIVE endeavor. not only that, construction projects accrue expenses more heavily in later years. from an accounting standpoint, the backweighting of the package is entirely justified. it also makes more sense for the community to be able to make use of the money as it comes, and not in a lump sum for them to manage. one might think of the agreement as an annuity package?

    • Anonymous

      i think new york city will have a lot more to worry about than a so-called "bathtub of toxic chemicals" on the day that hudson river overflows into the city. i'm no geologist, but that sounds like a highly concocted scenario. anyway, i'm glad it seems that this expansion has finally come to be viewed as inevitable.

    • so true

      that space is definitely not something I'd classify as industrial.

  4. good thing

    your "definitions" don't count. Hate to break it to you but the zoning commission DOES get to decide what's industrial and what's not.

  5. andrew

    there is an argument that is frequently raised which basically goes ¨real estate in New York is a tough game, if it wasn´t Columbia it would be some evil luxury developer that would not even bother to throw Harlem a cent. At least Columbia is being benevolent in offering the community some compensation for its losses.¨

    First, this argument is counterfactual - as stated before, Columbia owns some large percentage (perhaps 85) of the area. There is not going to be another developer, and conjuring up a phony bogeyman to justify one´s own development strategy is merely a diversionary tactic. The question is no longer who will develop West Harlem, but how Columbia, as the developer, will be allowed to do it. Although Columbia is the only real relevant developer, it is not the only social actor in the community, and while its development may be inevitable, the form it takes is still subject to intervention by the Harlem community, CPC, CB9, etc.

    Secondly, the SCEG argument presupposes correctly that the current system of high-income development is flawed, that city processes such as ULURP that are meant to be a reform-era regulating mechanism are biased towards developers, and that market-based approaches to combatting displacement are insufficient to prevent a massive exodus of low-income people of color - the city´s working class - from Harlem. The argument is NOT ¨Columbia is worse than other developers¨. The argument is that as an institution that has PR concerns and has to respond in some way to student pressure, there is at least space to push THIS PARTICULAR (and quite sizable) development to conform to social sustainability standards far higher than what would normally be expected of a developer in a real estate market guided by neoliberal principles.

    The city is a dynamic, fluid entity and development cannot be, and should not be stopped. However, forcing a large, unusually public-relations sensitive developer with a student constituency into being responsible with its development in a way that Donald Trump would not be is not an unreasonable request, although it may go against the development grain.

© 2006-2015 Blue and White Publishing Inc.