An Analysis of the 2003 East Harlem Rezoning

Michael J. Storm 

Almost a decade ago, in June of 2003, the New York City Council approved a proposal to rezone a significant portion of East Harlem. The event was a triumph for both CIVITAS and Community Board 11, which had been jointly working on the project since 2000. Since 2003, the rezoning has had a substantial effect on neighborhood growth and composition by controlling where and how much redevelopment occurs. The results have been a success for East Harlem. 

The Silberman School of Social Work at Hunter College at 119th Street and Third Avenue was constructed in 2011 and is an example of the contextual zoning requirements proposed in 2003 by CIVITAS and CB11. 

Photo by Michael J. Storm. 

The transformation that has occurred in East Harlem is seen in the development that has taken place since 2003, much of which is located on Second and Third Avenues. CIVITAS’s research indicates that in less than a decade more than 45 new buildings have been constructed in the rezoned blocks. New development, such as the new Silberman School of Social Work at Hunter College on East 119th Street, exemplifies the contextual zoning requirements that CIVITAS and CB11 proposed: height limits, a contextual street wall, and a mandatory setback above the height of surrounding buildings.

Starting with a neighborhood assessment, CB11 developed a rezoning proposal with the guidance of Richard Bass, a professional planner hired by CIVITAS. The area in consideration covered 40% of East Harlem: between East 98th and East 123rd streets, extending from slightly east of Lexington Avenue to the East River. Of primary concern to both CIVITAS and CB11 was the increase of new development in East Harlem that, if left unchecked, could drastically change the neighborhood’s built environment. 

While the development in East Harlem was beginning to grow, the existing zoning designation, called R7-2, gave developers the most area when they built tall towers surrounded by open space, similar to many public housing developments. Not only did these buildings disrupt the neighborhood’s low-rise character, they discouraged investment in building on smaller properties such as vacant lots. Construction under R7-2 also lacked a height limit, allowing developers to purchase air rights from surrounding buildings to build even higher. 

The Miles at 121st Street and Lexington illustrates the effect of the R7-2 Zoning incentives. The 32-story building sits along Lexington Avenue, stretching from 121st street to 122nd street. Behind the slab building is a barren open space occupying about half of the city block. Across the street, similar buildings on smaller lots are set back from the street. There are only two residential entrances on the street, not counting the Miles, and no storefronts. While the tall buildings allow for open space at the base, the open space is barren and the lack of buildings fronting 121st Street leaves the street itself abandoned—it is uninteresting at best and unsafe at worst. 

The new contextual zoning requirements are identical to the Quality Housing program that was available before the 2003 rezoning with one crucial difference: Quality Housing was an optional addition to traditional zoning regulations whereas under contextual zoning, it is a requirement. An additional attribute of the recent rezoning has been the location of new developments on small vacant lots, a result of choices made in building density, known as floor area ratio (FAR), by CB11 and CIVITAS during the rezoning process. 

The limit on density along the side streets discourages redevelopment of existing buildings, retaining housing stock for the community and preserving the scale and residential character of the side streets. “When you look at the math [the FAR of the 2003 rezoning] there is not enough incentive to knock down an existing building” said Richard Bass of the rezoning. 

Increasing the FAR was a tool in the rezoning for redevelopment but only applied to the major avenues, which were up-zoned significantly. Increasing the density along avenues created a large amount of new development at higher density that would not have occurred under the conditions of R7-2, and “it is probably where the rezoning had its greatest impact,” according to CIVITAS Director Mark Alexander, “the avenues can hold it.” 

As CIVITAS continues to work with CB11 on rezoning other areas of East Harlem, the successes of the 2003 rezoning will continue to inform our engagement with the zoning process. 

To read the complete spring 2013 issue of CIVITAS News, visit http://civitasnyc.org/civitas-newsletters/