In mid November I attended the “ZONING THE CITY: Addressing NYC’s 21st Century Challenges” conference, commemorating the 50th anniversary of the passage of the 1961 Zoning Resolution. The event was sponsored by the NYC Department of City Planning, Harvard University Graduate School of Design, and the Steven L. Newman Real Estate Institute at Baruch College, and was chaired by Amanda Burden, Director of the NYC Department of City Planning and Chair of CPC, and by Professor Jerold S. Kayden of the Harvard University Graduate School of Design.

The major points I came away with are:

(1)    Simplifying zoning is not realistic although the accretion of laws should be cleaned up.

(2)   Use regulations may no longer make sense, environmental laws can control incompatible uses.

(3)   Manufacturing has evolved and can be compatible with other uses; mixed use is to be encouraged.

(4)  Demographic change calls for new models of housing.

(5)   Public improvements create value which can be captured for public benefit through tax increment finance.

(6)  Technology can be a tool for making zoning more transparent.

The conference was well attended by architects, planners and land use attorneys, and the following are my observations and notes from the eventful day.

Robert K. Steel, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, presented the opening remarks in lieu of Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Mr. Steel spoke about the anticipated growth of NYC’s population by one million people by 2035 and the steps the Bloomberg administration has taken over the past 10 years to make the City economically competitive, socially equitable, physically attractive, and sustainable. There have been 114 rezoning actions which have covered 37% of the area of the City. Professor Jerold S. Kayden set the stage for later speakers by emphasizing that zoning is a tool for implementing a comprehensive plan. Zoning has typically controlled use, shape and bulk, but has evolved beyond these traditional planning concerns with incentives for open space, affordable housing, grocery stores, bikes, sustainability, etc.  New York City is fairly unique in that its administrative model is “as-of-right” zoning; most other jurisdictions have “discretionary” zoning. NYC zoning is prescriptive, other models are “form based” or “performance based”.

Speakers who reviewed the history of zoning in New York City included Hilary Ballon, Deputy Vice Chancellor NYU Abu Dhabi; Carol Willis founder of the Skyscraper Museum; and Professor Alex Garvin of Yale University. NYC established the nation’s first zoning resolution in 1916. Subsequent changes in social and economic forces led to a complete revamping by 1961. It was feared that the 1916 zoning would permit a population of 55 million! The 1961 zoning was sized to accommodate a population of 12 million. “Plan for Rezoning the City of NY” by Harrison Ballard & Allen came out in 1950; it introduced the concept of floor area ratio (FAR), open space ratio (OSR), and sky exposure plane, with building forms modeled on Corbusier’s “tower in the park”. A second attempt in 1958 “Zoning NYC” by Voorhees Walker Smith & Smith used the earlier study but increased bulk in commercial zones, protected one- and two-family houses, and extended the grace period to 1963. It was successfully passed in 1961 under the leadership of Mayor Robert Wagner and City Planning Commissioner James Feldt. 

The 1961 Zoning Resolution accepted the need for larger floor plate office buildings, automobiles, shopping malls, and introduced incentive zoning to create plazas in congested pedestrian areas. The highest commercial use areas were permitted 15 FAR, with a 20% bonus for providing a plaza.  Office towers could have 40% coverage instead of the 25% formerly permitted. The 1961 Zoning Resolution has continued to evolve in response to changing conditions.  Incentives for pedestrian open space have created a new cityscape, including interior spaces. Transfer of development rights has allowed the preservation of historic landmarks but historic districts are de facto zoning. Special districts have protected areas like the theater district. Contextual zoning regulations were created as an alternative to “height factor” regulations of FAR and OSR in response to neighborhood concerns with out of scale development. Requirements for Inclusionary Housing, bike parking, environmental concerns have all been added to the Resolution. Over time the Zoning Resolution has increased in complexity, as it tries to keep up with changing markets and social conditions. Professor Garvin said Paris has the ideal model of a public street, that NYC zoning should be about creating great streets, parks and civic buildings. The balance between open space and density continues to be an issue for the future. Use regulations may no longer make sense with the loss of heavy industry and other social changes. There are industrial business zones such as the Brooklyn Navy Yard (green technology, movie and TV studios); the Brooklyn Army Terminal (biotechnology). The loss of heavy industry has allowed the creation of waterfront parks and new sites for housing. Subsequent speakers focused on the challenges facing NYC in the 21st century. 

“THE COMPETITIVE CITY” was addressed by Daniel L. Doctoroff, President and CEO of Bloomberg LP and former deputy mayor, and later by Vishaan Chakrabarti and Kairos Shen. Mr. Doctoroff noted that there is an intense global competition for business, residents, and visitors and that the Bloomberg administration has addressed many issues to retain NYC’s competitive edge. NYC will remain the financial capital for decades, it may be losing market share but it is still the leader. Since 1970 there has been a great de-industrialization of NYC, with manufacturing down 89%; as a result huge areas had inappropriate zoning designations, which created new opportunities. There have been major rezoning such as Hudson Yards; contextual rezoning to preserve communities; new infrastructure such as the extension of the #7 subway line and new ferry routes; attractions like Brooklyn Bridge Park and the High Line; economic development initiatives that have grown the film and TV industries, and kept tourism robust with 90,000 hotel rooms; transit-centric rezoning to encourage density within a half-mile of transit; and forward looking sustainability initiatives like PlaNYC. Mayor Bloomberg is looking to the future by strengthening NYC as an intellectual center; the City is now evaluating proposals by Stanford NYC, Cornell NYC Tech Campus and others to establish a new $2 billion engineering technology campus in New York City. 

Vishaan Chakrabarti, Director of the Center for Urban Real Estate and professor at Columbia University, spoke about “sprawl versus tall”; that Midtown should be rezoned to create a modern CBD at 30+FAR. Affordability and greater mixed use could be achieved by increasing density along transit corridors. Parks could provide wind energy and waste-to-energy. He introduced the concept of cap & trade air rights, not just limited to landmarks, to make use of the four billion square feet of existing but unused air rights. For resilience in dealing with climate change, his students looked at the New York harbor as an opportunity to use landfill to create barrier islands, and ultimately to extend Lower Manhattan to Governors Island with a land bridge. 

Kairos Shen, Chief Planner, City of Boston, spoke about zoning as a competitive tool and provided examples of recent experience in Boston where a former industrial waterfront area has been rezoned as an Innovation District.  Boston sees its universities as an incredible asset, but to retain these young smart people, incubate business and create housing new zoning has been established allowing Boston Planning to curate a mix of uses with inclusionary housing at 15%; micro units at 15% (co-housing, shared spaces); and business incubator space at 25%. They have also created Quick Zones, which is tailor made zoning in response to market and global competition. 

“THE EQUITABLE CITY” was addressed by Rosanne Haggerty, President, Community Solutions; and later by Professor Toni Griffin of City College, and John Rahaim, Director of Planning, San Francisco. Ms. Haggerty noted that New York is a city of contrasts, and the gap between rich and poor is widening; 1.6 million people live in poverty with tremendous need in areas of employment, housing, health, and education.  Instead of investment in social progress, public financing currently goes to incarceration. This is money better spent on public infrastructure (safety, work, parks, schools, housing).  She suggested that innovative design should be located in the neediest areas; that a range of housing options, as recently proposed by Citizens Housing and Planning Council, provide options for the future. She noted that as shown by grass roots movements like Occupy Wall Street or the Tea Party, policy is not always driven by elites.

“THE SUSTAINABLE CITY” was addressed by Rohit Aggarwala, of C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group; and later by Harriet Tregoning and Jonathan Rose. Mr. Aggarwala noted that while outdoor air quality was improving, indoor air pollution and noise continue to be issues. He spoke about how NYC is fuel efficient due to density and mass transit, but our supply chain, amount of air travel and degree of waste are issues in terms of energy use. Mr. Aggarwala cautioned that climate change will have an impact on the City; we should look to the future and act on those things we can control, such as buildings and infrastructure.

Harriet Tregoning, Director of Planning, District of Columbia, spoke about the limitations of zoning in implementing sustainable practice, that it requires intergovernmental cooperation with zoning, building codes, and tax codes acting in concert. She described initiatives in Washington DC such as transit oriented development (no parking required, mixed use, active ground floor); accessory dwelling units for one-family houses; walkable neighborhoods (corner stores in residential districts); no minimum parking requirements and capability of first floor conversion. Sustainability initiatives also include removing rooftop restrictions to permit solar panels or wind turbines; a Green Area Ratio; protection of flood plains; requirement for 35% tree canopy; encouraging farmers markets and grocery stores; and density incentives to permit live-near-work. Jonathan Rose, President, Jonathan Rose Companies, noted that climate change requires a 100 year investment; that sustainability is about resilience.  We should reinforce natural solutions and learn from other communities about flood resistance. The Second Avenue subway corridor should be upzoned; mixed use should be encouraged. Solutions to housing such as the old boarding house with smaller individual space/bigger social space more closely match the new demographic conditions. Notions of being more flexible, such as weekend pop up shops and zip cars point to other incremental solutions.

“THE PHYSICAL CITY” was addressed by Paul Goldberger, New Yorker architecture critic, New School Chair in Design & Architecture, and later by Professor Matthew Carmona and Peter Park. Mr. Goldberger noted that the City needs to grow while maintaining its character; the preciousness of preservation must be balanced by the vitality of the new.  History is important but it must allow for change. NYC has an excellent 19^th century framework: the grid, the transit system, and its neighborhoods. Investment in the public realm including the High Line, new parks, waterfront access, streets and infrastructure are critical. There is enormous need for housing, new models to reflect changes in demographics and work arrangements need to be explored. He cautioned that there is a risk in over planning, that there are limits to zoning, that urban design is not de facto architecture, that there must be room for serendipity and happy accidents. Factors of history, geography, and landscape impact the city, not just the political act/intervention; regulations come out of a particular culture. Great cities require the calibration of old and new, of maintaining the elusive factor of time, layering, and authenticity while permitting new development. Urban places are messy, a result of multiple players over time.

Professor Matthew Carmona of the Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, noted that in London all projects are negotiated in great detail, it is zoning by other means as interpreted through a discretionary and political process. There are some Conservation Areas, these are seen as adding value, and are areas of opportunity and intensification. Other controls include Public Transport Accessibility Levels which establish habitable rooms per hectare; Protected View Corridor and Backdrop (river prospects, linear views, townscape views, panoramas). There are planning agreements, which are a negotiated tax for development; and a community infrastructure levy is coming. Peter Park, a Loeb Fellow at the Harvard Graduate School of Design, has provided new form based zoning codes for Milwaukee and Denver. He suggested that this type of zoning code promotes design excellence, and due to its predictability hastens desirable investment.

Jerold Kayden moderated the final panel discussion: “WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?” Mary Ann Tighe, CEO NY Tri-State Region, CB Richard Ellis, and Chair REBNY, said that New York has become a romantic 20th century city of overbuilt old buildings with no renewal of office stock near transit; Midtown should be upzoned. The average age of office buildings is 71 years in NYC, and 58 years in London (Robert Stern pointed out that WWII might be responsible for that!). All the Manufacturing districts should be rezoned; the definition of uses needs to be broadened to reflect live/work; and back of house functions like loading and curb cuts need to be addressed.

Thom Mayne, founder of Morphosis, stated he is not interested in zoning, he wants to approach design problems without the constraints it imposes. Zoning rules should be evaluated by their ability to create great urbanism and architecture. He compared the loss of confidence in US culture with the vitality of Chinese cities; he urged that NYC be seen as a three dimensional environment. Robert A. M. Stern, Dean of Yale School of Architecture, countered that the NYC skyline should be protected, that while the skyline will evolve, “a city is more than a bunch of phalluses on the skyline”. Mr. Stern was concerned that we have private splendor and public squalor. He also thought that the public sector should be subject to the same codes that regulate the private sector.