Comments on: Shaping the Next New York: The Promise of Bloomberg’s Rezonings

By: rube goldberg

rube goldberg — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:42:47 +0000

Year’s ago, Burden’s predecessor, Joe Rose, pushed “Unified Bulk” – a major overhaul of the Zoning Resolution that would have put absolute limits on height and bulk everywhere in the City, essentially replacing the 1961 “tower in the park” zoning model with what amounted to contextual zoning. That proposal had to be withdrawn when it ran into a buzz saw of opposition from REBNY and others. As a commissioner under Joe Rose, Burden obviously learned an important lesson. By eschewing the Big Bang theory of zoning and focusing on individual neighborhoods one at a time, she is well on the way to accomplishing what her predecessor could not. It’s tempting to call this “stealth” rezoning, but it’s no secret; the DCP web site even boasts that the Bloomberg/Burden 100 rezonings are “the largest rezoning agenda since 1961.” What’s surprising is that there’s been not a peep out of REBNY or anyone else that so opposed Unified Bulk. That’s either a testament to Burden’s political adroitness or a commentary on the relative powerlessness of the real estate industry in the Bloomberg/Burden era.

By: wydo

wydo — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 14:01:55 +0000

The rezoning of the Greenpoint waterfront for huge hi-rises (not yet built, but they will be there as soon as the economy heads North) has left many residents there very bitter. Its a low-level family community with very poor transit access. Community Board 1 mindlessly approves any 40-story behemoth as long as theres an “affordable housing” sop in there, and the city just moves on, blinkers attached, with its formulaic rezoning….

By: gecko

gecko — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:47:21 +0000

An agile comprehensive transit system scaled by the distributed and on-demand capability of bicycles including greatly improved technology and capabilities would significantly mitigate the need for cars, static spacial restrictions and the requisite zoning.

First the streets must be many times safer than they are today.

Just because injury and mortality statistcs are perceived as low does not mean that public spaces and streets in this city are serving its citizens in the best possible way as people will not use them or use them in a comfortable and convenient way if they are dangerous.

A distinctly people-friendly city will be both a social and commercial success.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:10:15 +0000

To add to what Niccolo says, Bloomberg has not consulted the neighborhoods affected before upzoning them, and has ignored the existing mechanism for neighborhoods to propose upzoning, the 197a plan. Jane Jacobs compared his approach to vandalism.

In the inner-urban neighborhoods that need upzoning the most, Bloomberg has always preferred megaprojects run by connected developers to small-scale neighborhood-oriented development. Thus he’s supported Atlantic Yards and the Columbia expansion and championed Hudson Yards, instead of competing 197a proposals by the affected neighborhoods. With Columbia it was particularly egregious, as one of the major bones of contention is an underground parking garage spanning the entire area of Manhattanville to be rezoned; the local neighborhood associations will tell you that the parking garage is only there to give Columbia an excuse to use eminent domain on the properties above it.

By: Boris

Boris — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:08:48 +0000

This is a feather in the cap of rail promoters in the rail vs. BRT debate. Rail lines are permanent enough that government planners account for them. In New York City, some “auto-dependent” areas are really “not enough bus service” areas. Neither SBS nor regular bus-heavy corridors like Staten Island’s Hylan Blvd appear on Burden’s radar.

By: Niccolo Machiavelli

Niccolo Machiavelli — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:00:56 +0000

Your review and their plans don’t even mention the words industry, freight or manufacturing. The map, additionally, doesn’t show manufacturing and industrial zones wiped out in the shell game of down-zoning one neighborhood only to upscale another. Most of the change from industrial zones to residential zones has occurred at some distance from mass transit and most of the down-zoning out side of the former two-fare zones, e.g. Park Slope, has occurred despite solid mass transit connections. The economic effects of the down-zoning tsunami will be felt for generations in terms of opportunity costs, lowered taxable real estate values and structural inefficiencies. Meanwhile, working class New Yorkers will pile into their automobiles for reverse commutes to Long Island and New Jersey. Or, they will leave altogether since the per square foot land rents will be so high they won’t be able to afford to live here anyway.

Down-zoning is sort of a perfect storm as it simultaneously lowers property values while raising the cost per square foot of housing and increasing the cost of transportation, sewage, water and sanitation. And, look at how much red is on that map. More and more streets will be turned into traffic sewers such as 4th Ave. in Brooklyn (despite the up-zoning shell game DeBlasio and Markowitz played with Park Slope densities) as more and more trucks have to come in to resupply our basic needs.

By: Larry Littlefield

Larry Littlefield — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:54:39 +0000

Perhaps, given the oncoming institutional collapse, growth within walking distance of transit is less important than growth within a bicycle ride of the CBD. Or a bicycle ride of multiple subway lines, in case one is out of action for a decade or two.