Timothy Kerner, AIA is principal of Terra Studio LLC, a member of the Design Advocacy Group, and Zoning Committee Co-Chair for the Center City Residents Association
By Timothy Kerner
Despite the relative slowing of Philadelphia’s real estate market, the rapid pace of development decisions that will change the character of the city has not abated.
Just in December, a 715 foot tall tower on Delaware Avenue was approved by City Council, a 268 foot condo project received approval from the Zoning Board of Adjustment to exceed Old City’s 65’ height limit, and - of course - two waterfront casino sites were selected by the state Gaming Board. Unfortunately, these decisions and others made by various government agencies were not coordinated by a comprehensive plan for the city. The reality is that nearly every zoning issue is decided on a parcel by parcel basis without consideration for the broader impact on the surrounding areas.
The current zoning code receives such little respect because it is widely perceived that the zoning categories do not adequately address current market realities or benefit the neighborhoods. The code is considered as basically a starting point for ad-hoc negotiations between developers, neighborhood groups and government agencies. There are many risks inherent in this approach. Unplanned development can create detrimental levels of traffic congestion, shut off possibilities to expand public recreational amenities, disregard opportunities to strategically re-direct development activity, and diminish the pedestrian-scaled urban character that makes city neighborhoods so desirable. Clearly, the time has come to reform the zoning code to appropriately guide new development, strengthen the character of the city and positively impact the lives of city residents.
In recognition of this need, City Council members James Kenney and Frank DiCicco introduced a bill in December to create a Zoning Code Commission to reform the zoning code. The bill received support from the Committee on Law and Government but did not receive sufficient support to pass into law when it came before the full City Council. According to Councilmember Brian O’Neil, who voted against the legislation, the bill favored the concerns of Center City and developers; it did not address the needs of neighborhoods such as his in the Northeast. Did O’Neil wrongly support the status quo or are there justifiable reasons for his concerns?
Not surprisingly, one of the primary supporters of zoning reform is the developer community, represented by the Building Industry Association. The BIA seeks to streamline the zoning codes so they are easier to understand and this desire is reflected in the text of the proposed bill. It is a reasonable goal and a strong case for the necessity is made in the BIA publication “If We Fix It, They Will Come.” Philadelphia has 55 different zoning categories and over 30 Special District overlays, each with their own rules that augment the zoning regulations. The combination of categories and overlays are a source of confusion that add time and expense to the development process.
The BIA publication cites the recent zoning reform process in Chicago as a successful effort that reduced the number of residential zoning categories from thirty-two to just ten. But this tells just part of Chicago’s zoning reform story; streamlining was just one of many goals. The primary intentions of the zoning code revisions identified by the Chicago Department of Planning and Development were:
• Promoting walkable neighborhoods and streets
• Planning for parks and open space
• Developing mixed-use districts
• Maintaining transportation corridors
• Creating accessible housing
• Encouraging density near mass transit
• Planning for Manufacturing Districts
Outdated zoning classifications were consolidated but new zoning classifications were created. These new classifications allow for mixed-use development, address the existing urban context, discourage automobile incursion into pedestrian areas, provide character standards for new buildings, increase density allowances in strategically located areas, and allow for the maintenance and increase of park and recreational amenities. Philadelphia’s zoning reform legislation should be rewritten to emphasize similar quality of life priorities. Streamlining is important but just one of many reasons to support zoning reform.
O’Neil criticized the bill for not sufficiently considering the needs of neighborhoods beyond Center City and he has a good point. The bill calls for just two meetings in City Hall as a means to gather public input. This would be highly insufficient. The success of the code revision effort will depend on an appropriate public involvement process. Public opinion must be sought at the community level and meetings should begin in the neighborhoods to identify important local issues. The process should not be a top-down approach, the knowledge needs to work its way upward from the communities. This is the only way to gain the detailed knowledge necessary to the effort and also the only way to gain the community support necessary for the eventual City Council approval of the Zoning Commission recommendations.
Another important question needs to be raised - how can the zoning code be rewritten without an overall plan for the city? One reason the city’s zoning categories are not current is because a comprehensive plan for the city has not been completed for over forty years. How can zoning issues such as the appropriate height of buildings be addressed without understanding where it is most appropriate to have tall buildings? This is a planning question that can only be addressed with an understanding for various city wide aspects such as population density, transportation linkages and supporting infrastructure. Streamlining the zoning code without guidance from a planning effort would not help move the city towards positive growth. The Zoning Reform Commission should be empowered to develop a well-crafted vision of the future of the city. The current version of the zoning reform bill contains no reference to city planning. Successful zoning reform is not possible without a planning process.
Philadelphia needs zoning reform and the zoning reform legislation needs to be rewritten to assuage the concerns of council members and gain sufficient support for passage. The zoning reform bill must address the quality of life issues that are essential to all neighborhoods, mandate an effective public input process and also address the need for a comprehensive plan for the city. Philadelphia possesses a remarkable history of successful and innovative city planning initiatives such as Penn’s original plan, Bacon’s Society Hill revitalization, and more recently, the Schuylkill River Park. It is time to build upon this tradition of excellence and support zoning reform and comprehensive planning that successfully guides the city’s future growth for the benefit of neighborhoods, businesses and residents throughout the city.
