Rezoning a top-notch CBD: The choreography of land-use regulation and creative destruction in Manhattan’s East Midtown

Abstract

Chinese

This paper makes the case for the connection between making land-use regulatory changes and the process of destruction and redevelopment. Under the capitalist imperative, buildings that do not fulfil the full potential for profit are likely to be demolished (or refurbished) but demolition and new development are not shaped exclusively by the immutable laws of the market as they are mediated and facilitated by specific institutional contexts. Using the case of East Midtown rezoning in New York City, the paper examines the amendments of two land-use regulatory mechanisms: the enlargement of development rights (rezoning or upzoning) and the relaxation of the spatial limitations on the usage of existing unused rights (transferable development rights). While apparently unconnected, upzoning and transferable development rights are part of the regulatory framework that seeks to secure the ongoing generation of the highest-possible profits for private as well as public interests. By examining the choreography of rezoning and transferable development rights, the paper shows how the mechanics of creative destruction work while substantiating an existing body of knowledge on land use policies and practices in New York City. When used together, rezoning and transferable development rights are instrumental in remaking the built environment. Essentially, the rezoning of a 78-block area in East Midtown Manhattan unlocks captured and latent development rights that otherwise could not come about, and demonstrates the necessity of institutional arrangements to make creative destruction actually work.

Keywords

built environment CBD land use real estate redevelopment/regeneration rezoning

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abramson

(2016) Obsolescence: An Architectural History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Angotti

(2008) New York for Sale: Community Planning Confronts Global Real Estate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Bagli

(2013a) Office tower’s owners may profit from plan to allow sale of landmarks’ air rights. The New York Times, 2 August. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/nyregion/office-towers-owners-may-profit-from-plan-to-allow-sale-of-landmarks-air-rights.html (accessed 23 October 2023).

Bagli

(2013b) Future unclear for towers on East Side. The New York Times, 14 November. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/14/nyregion/future-unclear-for-towers-on-east-side.html (accessed 10 June 2022).

Bagli

(2015) Owner of Grand Central sues developer and city for $1.1 billion over air rights. The New York Times, 29 September: A22.

Bagli

(2016) Owners of Grand Central Terminal drop $1.1 billion suit The New York Times, 11 August: A20.

Bagli

(2018) With $240 million deal, floodgates open for air rights in Midtown East. The New York Times, 4 March. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/02/nyregion/jp-morgan-chase-midtown-east-air-rights.html (accessed 3 June 2021).

Barbanel

(2015) Up in the air: development rights of New York City landmarks. The Wall Street Journal, 5 April. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/up-in-the-air-development-rights-of-new-york-city-landmarks-1428280007 (accessed 18 October 2020).

Barr

(2016) Building the Skyline: The Birth and Growth of Manhattan’s Skyscrapers. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

10.

Barras

Clark

(1996) Obsolescence and performance in the Central London office market. Journal of Property Valuation and Investment 14(4): 63–78.

11.

Beauregard

(2022) The documents of re-zoning: planning aspirations in New York City. In: Rydin

Beauregard

Cremaschi

, et al. (eds) Regulation and Planning: Practices, Institutions, Agency. New York, NY: Routledge, pp.15–26.

12.

Been

Infranca

(2013) Transferable development rights programs: “Post-Zoning?” Brooklyn Law Review 78(2): 435–465.

13.

Been

Infranca

Madar

, et al. (2014) Unlocking the right to build: Designing a more flexible system for transferring development rights, New York University: Furman Center for Real estate and Urban Policy. Available at: https://furmancenter.org/files/FurmanCenter_UnlockingtheRighttoBuild.pdf (accessed 21 April 2021).

14.

Brash

(2011) Bloomberg’s New York: Class and Governance in the Luxury City. Athens GA and London: Georgia University Press.

15.

Brenner

Theodore

(2002) Cities and the geographies of actually existing neoliberalism. Antipode 34(3): 349–379.

16.

Bryson

(1997) Obsolescence and the process of creative reconstruction. Urban Studies 34(9): 1439–1458.

17.

Buitelaar

Moroni

De Franco

(2021) Building obsolescence in the evolving city. Reframing property vacancy and abandonment in the light of urban dynamics and complexity. Cities 108: 102964.

18.

Busa

(2017) The Creative Destruction of New York City: Engineering the City for the Elite. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

19.

Chen

(2020) Cashing in on the sky: Financialization and urban air rights in the Taipei Metropolitan Area. Regional Studies 54(2): 198–208.

20.

Chiodelli

Moroni

(2016) Zoning-integrative and zoning-alternative transferable development rights: Compensation, equity, efficiency. Land Use Policy 52: 422–429.

21.

CivicVisions (2013) Icons, Placeholders and Leftovers: Midtown East Report. Prepared for Midtown 21C: Coalition for Globally Competitive NYC.

22.

Costonis

(1973) Development rights transfer: An exploratory essay. The Yale Law Journal 83: 75–128.

23.

Costonis

(1977) The disparity issue: A context for the Grand Central Terminal Decision. Harvard Law Review 91(2): 402–426.

24.

Cuozzo

(2017) Midtown East rezoning campaign still on track, New York Post, March 13. Available at: https://nypost.com/2017/03/13/midtown-east-rezoning-campaign-still-on-track/ (accessed 12 March 2023)

25.

Davidson

(2008) The glass stampede. New York Magazine, 5 September. Available at: https://nymag.com/arts/architecture/features/49959/ (accessed 22 December 2020).

26.

Davis

(2021) How do upzonings impact neighborhood demographic change? Examining the link between land use policy and gentrification in New York City. Land Use Policy 103: 105347.

27.

Doctoroff

(2017) Greater Than Ever: New York’s Big Comeback. New York, NY: PublicAffairs.

28.

Dunlap

(1989) A battle looms over Grand Central’s air space. The New York Times, 6 July, B3

29.

Dunlap

(1991) Plan to use Grand Central air rights for tower is rejected. The New York Times, 8 August, B3.

30.

Dunlap

(1992) Grand Central owner seeks broader use of air rights. The New York Times, 3 May, 1.

31.

East Midtown Steering Committee (2015) Final Report, October. Available at: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/plans-studies/greater-east-midtown/greater-east-midtown-steering-report.pdf (accessed 22 December 2020).

32.

Fainstein

(2001) The City Builders: Property Development in New York and London. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.

33.

Finn

(2013) The great air race. New York Times, 24 February, 1.

34.

Fitzsimmons

(2015) Plan to build tower at Grand Central is exchange for transit upgrades is approved. The New York Times, 27 May. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/28/nyregion/plan-to-build-tower-at-grand-central-in-exchange-for-transit-upgrades-is-approved.html (accessed 13 October 2021).

35.

Fisher

Leite

Weber

(2023) Value creation, capture, and destruction: Hudson yards and the false promise of self-financing mega-projects. Journal of the American Planning Association. American Planning Association 89(1): 134–145.

36.

Freemark

(2020) Upzoning Chicago. Urban Affairs Review 56 (3): 758–89

37.

Freemark

(2023) Zoning change: Upzonings, downzonings, and their impacts on residential construction, housing costs, and neighborhood demographics. Journal of Planning Literature. Epub ahead of print 4 April 2023. DOI: 10.1177/08854122231166.

38.

Giordano

(1987) Over-stuffing the envelope: The problems with creative transfer of development rights. The Fordham Urban Law Journal 16: 43–68.

39.

Goldberger

(1986) Architecture view: when air rights go underground The New York Times, 21 December, 1.

40.

Goldschmidt

(1964) Air Rights. American Society of Planning Officials, Information Report No. 186. Available at: https://www.planning.org/pas/reports/report186.htm (accessed 26 July 2020).

41.

Goodman

Neuman

(2017) Catholic church may cash in on air rights in Midtown rezoning deal. The New York Times, 27 July. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/nyregion/catholic-church-east-midtown-air-rights-deal.html (accessed 6 April 2023).

42.

Greenaway-McGrevy

Pacheco

Sorensen

(2021) The effect of upzoning on house prices and redevelopment premiums in Auckland, New Zealand. Urban Studies 58(5): 959–976.

43.

Greenaway-McGrevy

Phillips

PCB

(2023) The impact of upzoning on housing construction in Auckland. Journal of Urban Economics 136: 103555.

44.

Grodach

(2022) The institutional dynamics of land use planning: Urban industrial lands in San Francisco. Journal of the American Planning Association. American Planning Association 88(4): 537–549.

45.

Grodach

Martin

(2021) Zoning in on urban manufacturing: Industry location and change among low-tech, high-touch industries in Melbourne, Australia. Urban Geography 42(4): 458–480.

46.

Guironnet

Attuyer

Halbert

(2016) Building cities on financial assets: The financialisation of property markets and its implications for city governments in the Paris city-region. Urban Studies 53(7): 1442–1464.

47.

Haila

(1988) Land as a financial asset: The theory of urban rent as a mirror of economic transformation. Antipode 20(2): 79–101.

48.

Harvey

(1982) The Limits to Capital. Oxford: Blackwell.

49.

Hills

Schleicher

(2020) Building coalitions out of thin air: Transferable development rights and “Constituency Effects” in land Use Law. The Journal of Legal Analysis 12: 79–135.

50.

Homsy

Kang

(2023) Zoning incentives: Exploring a market-based land use planning tool. Journal of the American Planning Association. American Planning Association 89(1): 61–71.

51.

Huxtable

(1980) Architecture view: The problems of zoning. New York Times, 13 July: 25.

52.

Imrie

(2021) Concrete Cities: Why We Need to Build Differently. Bristol: Bristol University Press.

53.

Kayden

(1991) Zoning for dollars: New rules for an old game? Comments on the Municipal Art Society and Nollan cases. Washington University Journal of Urban and Contemporary Law 39: 3–51.

54.

Kayden

(2020) Is zoning the answer? What’s the question? In: Sclar

Baird-Zars

Ames Fischer

, et al. (eds) Zoning: A Guide for 21st-Century Planning. New York, NY: Routledge, pp. xvii–xxxii.

55.

Kuhlmann

(2021) Upzoning and single-family housing prices: A (very) early analysis of the Minneapolis 2040 Plan. Journal of the American Planning Association. American Planning Association 87(3): 383–395.

56.

Kusisto

Brown

(2012) Midtown’s new look unveiled, The Wall Street Journal, 11 July. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303919504577521411010664218 (accessed 1 October 2020).

57.

Le Corbusier (1947) When the Cathedrals Were White: A Journey to the Country of Timid People. New York, NY: Reynal & Hitchcock.

58.

Manville

Lens

Monkkonen

(2022) Zoning and affordability: A reply to Rodríguez-pose and Storper. Urban Studies 59(1): 36–58.

59.

McFarlane

Hurley

Sun

( (2023) Private-led land assembly and urban consolidation: The relative influence of regulatory zoning mechanisms. Land Use Policy 134: 134–106904.

60.

McNeill

(2020) The volumetric city. Progress in Human Geography 44(5): 815–831.

61.

Murray

Gordon

(2023) Land as airspace: How rezoning privatizes public space (and why governments should not give it away for free). Housing Policy Debate. 1–14. Epub ahead of print 31 July 2023. DOI: 10.1080/10511482.2023.2234878

62.

New York City (2023) Office Adaptive Reuse Study, January. Available at: https://www.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/plans-studies/office-reuse-task-force/office-adaptive-reuse-study.pdf (accessed 30 April 2023).

63.

NYCDCP (2012) East Midtown Study. Available at: https://www1.nyc.gov/site/planning/plans/greater-east-midtown/greater-east-midtown.page (accessed 10 August 2020).

64.

NYCDCP (2013) East Midtown Zoning Proposal. Available at: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/plans/east-midtown/east_midtown.pdf (accessed 11 April 2021).

65.

NYCDCP (2015) A Survey of Transferable Development Mechanisms in New York City, 26 February. Available at: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/plans-studies/transferable-development-rights/research.pdf (accessed 8 April 2021).

66.

NYCDCP (2017) Mayor de Blasio and Council Member Garodnick announce adoption of Greater East Midtown Rezoning, 9 August. Available at: https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/544-17/mayor-de-blasio-council-member-garodnick-adoption-greater-east-midtown-rezoning (accessed 2 November 2020).

67.

NYCDCP (New York City Department of City Planning) (1991) Grand Central Subdistrict. Available at: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/about/city-planning-history/grand_central_subdistrict.pdf (accessed 1 November 2020).

68.

Page

(1999) The Creative Destruction of Manhattan, 1900–1940. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

69.

Petretta

(2020) The Political Economy of Value Capture: How the Financialization of Hudson Yards Created a Private Rail Line for the Rich. PhD dissertation, Columbia University.

70.

REBNY (Real Estate Board of New York) (2015) Memorandum in support, Vanderbilt Corridor text amendment, City Council Committee on Zoning and Franchises, 14 April. Available at: https://www.rebny.com/content/rebny/en/newsroom/testimony/2015_Testimonials/Vanderbilt_Corridor_Text_Amendment_One_Vanderbilt_Special_Permit.html (accessed 8 April 2021).

71.

Renard

(2007) Property rights and the ‘transfer of development rights’: Questions of efficiency and equity. Town Planning Review 78(1): 41–60.

72.

Robinson

Attuyer

(2020) Extracting value, London style: Revisiting the role of the state in urban development. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 45(2): 303–331.

73.

RPA (Regional Plan Association) (2013) Testimony: East Midtown Rezoning – City Planning Commission hearing, 6 August. Available at: https://rpa.org/latest/testimony/east-midtown-rezoning-city-planning-commission-hearing (accessed 8 April 2021).

74.

RPA (2019) Time to Act: Restoring the Promise of NYC’s Public Housing, October. Available at: https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rpa-org/pdfs/RPA-NYCHA_TimeToAct.pdf (accessed 11 February 2023).

75.

Rutland

(2010) The financialization of urban redevelopment. Geography Compass 4(8): 1167–1178.

76.

Sagalyn

(2001) Times Square Roulette: Remaking the City Icon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

77.

Satow

(2012) Amanda Burden wants to remake New York. She has 19 months left. The New York Times, 20 May, MB1.

78.

Schulz

(2021) New rendering revealed for 1,646-foot tower that may rise next to Grand Central, 6sqft, 18 May. Available at: https://www.6sqft.com/som-175-park-avenue-grand-hyatt-proposal/ (accessed 24 October 2021).

79.

Schumpeter

(1962) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York, NY: Harper and Row.

80.

Sclar

(2020) The financialization of zoning and the fungibility of air rights. In: Sclar

Baird-Zars

Ames Fischer

, et al. (eds) Zoning: A Guide for 21^st-Century Planning. New York, NY: Routledge, pp.37–54.

81.

Sclar

(2021) The infinite elasticity of air: New York City’s financialization of transferable development rights. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 80(2): 353–380.

82.

Shih

Chiang

(2022) A politically less contested and financially more calculable urban future: Density techniques and heightened land commodification in Taiwan. Environment and Planning A. Epub ahead of print 5 October 2022. DOI: 10.1177/0308518X221128588

83.

Sorensen

Okata

Fujii

(2010) Urban renaissance as intensification: Building regulation and the rescaling of place governance in Tokyo’s high-rise manshon boom. Urban Studies 47(3): 556–583.

84.

The Municipal Art Society of New York (2013) Accidental Skyline: A Blueprint for a more Intentional City. Available at: https://www.mas.org/initiatives/accidental-skyline/ (accessed 11 June 2020).

85.

US District Court, Southern District of New York (2015) Midtown TDR Ventures LLC et al v. City of New York et al, No. 15-07647. Available at: https://www.sdnyblog.com/files/2015/09/15-Civ.-07647-2015.09.28-Complaint-re-Grand-Central-Air-Rights.pdf (accessed 3 September 2021).

86.

Wacquant

Slater

Pereira

(2014) Territorial stigmatization in action. Environment and Planning A 46(6): 1270–1280.

87.

Weber

(2002) Extracting value from the city: Neoliberalism and urban redevelopment. Antipode 34(3): 519–540.

88.

Weber

(2015) From Boom to Bubble: How Finance Built the New Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

89.

Weber

(2021) Embedding futurity in urban governance: Redevelopment schemes and the time value of money. Environment and Planning A 53(3): 503–524.

90.

Weiss

(1992) Skyscraper zoning: New York’s pioneering role. Journal of the American Planning Association. American Planning Association 58(2): 201–212.

91.

Willis

(1995) Form Follows Finance: Skyscrapers and Skylines in New York and Chicago. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

92.

Wolf-Powers

(2005) Up-zoning New York City’s mixed-use neighborhoods: Property-led economic development and the anatomy of a planning dilemma. Journal of Planning Education and Research 24(4): 379–393.

93.

Yuan

(2019) Planning matters: Institutional perspectives on warehousing development and mitigating its negative impacts. Journal of the American Planning Association 85(4): 525–543.