Judging by a quick search on Google, it would appear that there's actually a fair amount of opposition to the plans, including recent stories by the Associated Press, The Village Voice, New York Sun, The New York Times, etc.

I guess it's all a matter of perspective.
 

Uh, Richard, excuse me, but I happen to live in that neighborhood and I can assure you, it is a real and wonderful community. Where do you get off telling us we don't count, just because you don't like the way the area looks? It's been improving steadily for years now, without the "help" of Columbia's bulldozers, thank you very much. Writing us off as a "complete dump" is a totally unfair way to prevent our voices from being heard.

Even now, Columbia's actions have a destructive effect on us: the building I live in was just purchased by a real estate company which is now turning it into co-ops, in anticipation of Columbia's growth. Of course, none of us who live here will be able to afford to buy in, and we'll all be forced out in the near future.

But I guess it's all worth it, so that the area ends up looking more like what you think it should.
 

I happen to live in the neighborhood too—or just south of it, on 122nd Street. And I'm sorry, but the area Columbia wants to develop is ugly, dirty and charmless. (Do you really live there, or around it? I'm curious to know your address.)

News accounts suggest that some 130 households occupy the area in question, so that's not exactly a thriving community, is it?

Sorry, but the impression the protesters give is primarily of wanting to gouge Columbia for as much money as they can get. That may not be true, but it is the impression one gets. You know—Columbia has offered to pay their rent for five years. That's outrageous; they want nothing less than ten. Etc. Classic case of mau-mauing the flak catchers.

As to poster #1: Sure, little neighborhood group taking on big university—with a history of lousy community relations—is a good story. But "a fair amount of opposition" is a vague term, and deliberately so, I suspect. There is a small group that is vocal; I'll bet there are a lot more people in the area who think that this will be an immense plus for the area in the long-term.
 

I'm the 2nd anonymous, and I live right by 135th st.

What Columbia's doing will change the whole area -- not just the land that they've purchased, but surrounding blocks as well.

This isn't just an issue about mau-mau'ing or what you perceive to be extortion by neighborhood residents. It's about how decisions get made. That's what pisses people off. We know we're not at the table where the real decisions are being made. No amount of money is enough to make up for being excluded.
 

Yeah, but no offense—there aren't a whole lot of you, you don't own the property, and from all that one can see with the naked eye, you haven't done much to improve the property. (I don't see a lot of flowers planted...or trash picked up...or anything of this sort.) So why should you be at the table?
 

Actually, that's too harsh, so let me rephrase: I agree that your concerns are important and should be heard. But the truth is, they have been heard—and the only way they come across is as blanket, NIMBY opposition to a project that is going to be great for everyone but you (and probably you, if you play your cards right), and greed; Columbia has deep pockets, and we want to be taken care for years and years. Because if we aren't, we'll accuse Columbia of racism and being a bad neighbor, and we'll do our best to stop a project the university legitimately needs to keep it competitive with Yale and Harvard, etc.

Perhaps if the opposition proposed something constructive-something beyond vicious anti-Columbia rhetoric and what's-in-it-for-me wink-winks—it might be taken more seriously.
 

Too harsh, indeed. What a deeply undemocratic sentiment. You want me to pass a literacy test before I vote, too?

Perhaps if Columbia recognized the people who surround them as having equally legitimate interests in the area, instead of as the only thing preventing them from curing Alzheimer's, we might take it more seriously. It doesn't exactly have the best record on this score, you know.
 

I'm aware of Columbia's history. But that was 40 years ago.

I restate my case that the residents of the area haven't moved beyond demonizing Columbia to propose solutions that they'd prefer—other than pay me off, pay me off, pay me off.

If this were a thriving, healthy community we were talking about, I'd be much more sympathetic. It's 130 apartments in a large, run-down blighted industrial area whose improvement will bring benefits to Columbia and Harlem both.