Zoning out Jerome Avenue's Auto Industry

Zoning Out Jerome Avenue’s Auto Industry The Process and Outcome of Dispossession

Candidate Number: 10429 1 2 Abstract This study centers on the 2018 rezoning of Jerome Avenue in the Bronx, with a particular focus on the long-standing local auto industry. To do so, this paper investigates how auto businesses were considered in the rezoning process and how they are affected by the loss of land zoned for their line of work. The goal of the paper is not to understand the technical aspects of the rezoning process nor offer a proposal for modification. Rather, this paper seeks to understand how the City could alter regulation in a way that could dispossess hundreds of auto employees. More broadly, this is a question of the nature of work the City imagines for its residents. In reviewing the rezoning process and the outcome, this study hopes to highlight a current shortcoming in the aim of rezoning and explain the complexity of structure and the scale of power dynamics responsible. The study situates the rezoning in historical development trends and relied on government produced texts around the zoning, public data relevant to the topic, as well as interviews with a variety of stakeholders to answer its questions. The results will show that although the auto industry was considered in the process, it was largely left out of the resolution. Employing Susan Fainstein’s theoretical framework for a ‘just city,’ this paper will suggest how the City could orient rezoning to better benefit vulnerable populations like Jerome Avenue’s autoworkers.

3 4 Table of Contents Introduction 6

Methodology 7

Developing New York 9 Building Toward Crisis 9 Public to Property-led Process 10 Proliferation of Highest and Best Use 10

Jerome Avenue 13 Bronx, NY 13 Jerome Avenue's Makeup 14 Auto Industry Corridor 15 City Trends Related to the Industry 17

Considerations or Lack Thereof 18 The Proposal and Adoption of Rezoning 18 Zoning Out the Auto Industry 20 Assistance Programs 23

Zoning for 'a Just City' 26

Conclusion 29

References 31

Appendix A 34

Appendix B 35 5 Introduction

Gravel lots brimming with tires, open garages packed New York City Department of City Planning (DCP) sanc- with cars under repair, and employees sitting in cover- tioned the construction of high-rise apartments with alls on folding chairs chatting – a walk along Jerome -Av ground-floor retail use. Though the new developments enue in the Bronx can feel like of another era. But stand are not yet rising, change has started. Shops are closing. on the subway platform straddling over the road, and the glimmering of the not so distant skyscrapers reflect The updated zoning, while grandfathering the preexist- a different reality, one that will soon exist below the ing businesses, prohibits opening new auto-repair shops tracks too. The screech of the power wrench, the roar of on the changed lots. Although the businesses are not the engines, and the pounding beat of raggaeton from directly expelled by the regulatory shift, it is still a death auto sound shops will be silenced. The lingering scent knell for many. “Brick and mortar remain in place only of oil and paint will soon be the past, and those shim- as long as real estate developers aren’t interested in mering Manhattan skyscrapers will find their reflections building something new there” (Zukin, 2010: 25). Most in buildings stretching 225 feet above the spots from of the tenants do not own the land on which they oper- where the cacophony of the auto repair industry rang. ate, and landlords can find greater profit from buyers interested in the new zoning’s development possibilities. In March 2018, New York City Council passed an amend- Lease agreements will not be renewed, if not broken. ment to the zoning-code, the law that governs land-use and building regulation, which transforms the nature The zoning change did not come about as a direct at- of Jerome Avenue. While preserving a small section tack on the auto repair industry, but rather as a re- for auto-related industry, the corridor between 165th sponse to city-wide needs and growth strategy. The and 184th street will largely disallow the work that has change is part of DCP’s plan for Jerome Avenue that characterized the area for decades. In its place, the “provides a number of strategies to spur economic de- 6 velopment, improve health and quality of life, and an element easily overlooked – “the reconfiguration invest in the public realm and open spaces” (DCP, of a neighborhood affects not only people that live in 2018a: 1). The City imagines a corridor with air those neighborhoods …but also those that operate clean of toxic emissions, high-rises that will provide businesses in that area” (Williams & Needham, 2016: affordable units, improved public space, and great- 1). This paper will shine a light on local business, not er job opportunities. The rezoning’s implications, with the goal to serve as guide for amending the re- however, extend beyond the neighborhood’s char- zoning process, but rather to highlight a current short- acter. More broadly, it is about the kind of world of coming in its aim and explain the complexity of struc- work the city retains and the human consequences ture and the scale of power dynamics responsible. thereof. The regulatory change does more than re- strict the work historically connected with Jerome Methodology

Avenue. It is a disruption of livelihood, a state-sanc- This study of Jerome Avenue is not an assessment tioned economic dispossession for some of not only on the value of maintaining an auto repair corri- the city’s but the country’s most insecure citizens. dor nor a refute of the decision to rezone the district but rather an analysis of the way in which it “My community has been marginalized. It has was reimagined – an understanding of the pro- been eliminated,” stated Pedro Estevez, founder cess and the consequences of its limitations. of a United Auto Merchants Association (UAMA),

a Bronx-based non-profit that assists automotive Process: Though the paper is concerned with businesses operate and grow (Interview, 2019). the process of rezoning, it will not deconstruct the intricacies or technical elements of zoning. This paper will examine how the use of govern- The focus will be on the larger decision-mak- ment wielded regulatory tool allowed for the dis- ing process. It will focus on the power dynam- sembling of an industry that anchored a corridor ics and considerations of the stakeholders, and offered opportunity for its residents. In con- as well as situating the rezoning in context fronting the political, economic, and social mech- from hyperlocal to city scale and beyond. anisms that motivated the regulatory change, the study will focus around answering three questions: Consequences: While the full impact of the • What were the drivers of the rezoning? rezoning will not be known for years to come, there were immediate effects on the • To what extent was the auto industry con- neighborhoods, both during the proposal sidered in the rezoning process? period and after the zoning amendment’s • What does the rezoning mean for the adoption. The project’s scope, however, auto merchants? is limited to the auto repair industry in re- gard to its capacity to participate in the pro- While the rezoning process is public and transparent, cess as well as how the regulation change this investigation into Jerome Avenue will demon- will affect the viability of related businesses. strate that does not necessarily result in justice for those affected. There is a world of literature that In answering the posed questions, this study required centers around government easement of regulation a multifaceted approach, including a strong famili- for development and its effects on the neighborhood, arity with not only zoning and the Jerome Avenue but the Jerome Avenue rezoning brings to the fore 7 corridor but also New York City development more gen- nomic progression of the strategy. It will explain the shift erally. City-produced texts and policy documents as well from an interventionist to a neoliberal state. The next as academic literature related to the history of the city’s section will dive extensively into the auto industry, po- development and land-use served as knowledge base to sitioning it geographically and socioeconomically. This understand the drivers of the rezoning. Interviews with will provide necessary context for the auto industry’s government representatives from DCP, NYC Economic ability to participate in the rezoning process as well as Development Corporation (EDC), and the Department of considerations afforded to it. In reviewing the zoning Small Business Services (SBS) furthered comprehension documents and maps, the study attained a sense of the of the zoning process generally and as it occurred on City’s priorities and assessment of rezoning as well as Jerome Avenue. Interviews took place between March the forthcoming physical change, but human cost was and August 2019 both in person and over the phone. clear from interviews with auto businesses, advocates, and government employees. Finally, the paper frames The research surrounding the city development and the case study and current development paradigm in government interviews were also strong indicators of to Susan Fainstein’s concept of ‘the just city’ as an alterna- what extent the auto related industry was considered tive to the City’s evaluation the Jerome Avenue rezoning. in the rezoning. The City Council Members representing the affected area were contacted several times but never responded to the request for comment or information. As a complement and to recognize the human cost of the rezoning, however, the author also spoke with local business owners about their familiarity with the rezoning and experience with the process. These interviews were also important to determine what the rezoning means for the auto merchants. It was difficult to get in touch with many of the impacted businesses because of a justifiable skepticism and fear. The Figure 1: Workers on Jerome Avenue auto related community is comprised largely of Span- Source: Author 2019 ish-speaking immigrants and the legal standing of many of the businesses is tenuous. The author is grateful for those who did talk, but the circumstance of the inter- viewees is important to note and is a possible limitation on the ability for candidness and collecting complete information. The author also interviewed a prominent community activist, Pedro Estevez, who kept the auto businesses informed and advocated on their behalf. Fi- nally, publicly available data about the area, community and industry gave the study a sense of scale of impact.

The paper opens with an exploration of zoning, situ- Figure 2: Auto Glass andTire Sales on Jerome Avenue ating its position in New York’s historical development Source: Author 2019 trends. Important to the framing is the political and eco- 8 Developing New York ital for public investment (Heathcott, 2015). Leverag- Building Toward Crisis ing investment for infrastructure projects and prom- ises of social welfare through bond issuances, the The Jerome Avenue rezoning is bounded south City pursued development with a myopic perspec- to north by E 165th and 184th Streets, but the to- tive (Brash, 2011; Fainstein, 2001). It was a moment tal affected area spans more than 150 acres, or of building, with new office towers rising in Manhat- roughly half the size of Manhattan’s Financial Dis- tan, bringing up expenditures but not capital. New trict. Of the impacted area, around two-thirds of York was indebting itself long-term for short-term the land had a direct change to its zoning (DCP, expense, a strategy that brought the municipal gov- 2019d). Although it is spatially substantial, the ernment to the brink of bankruptcy during the reces- magnitude of the Jerome Avenue rezoning is noth- sion of the mid-1970s (Moody, 2007). While the “city ing novel for the city. This shift in zoning – altering government increasingly borrowed to fund current the use of land and reshaping the physical make- expenditures, backing its bonds with mythical or pre- up of neighborhoods – is continuation of a poli- viously committed anticipated revenues” (Fainstein, cy trend born decades ago out of fiscal necessity. 2001: 93), the banks continued to underwrite the

Though not yet in crisis, as early as the 1960s, New bonds. The proliferation of private capital for city York City government embraced questionable fiscal expense was relatively quick and dramatic, with the practices for its development (Moody, 2007). The bond market increasing from $7billion to $22billion federal government was slowly clawing back on the in the 15 years leading up to 1974 (Moody, 2007). New Deal era level of municipal investment, pushing Aware of the growing financial insecurity, the banks cities to defer to their local tax base and private cap- 9 began to dump their portfolios of city debt, resulting in not just represent a change in financing but priorities a “market glut created a scarcity of capital for New York as well (Moody, 2007). Without capital from the state City debt” (Brash, 2003: 65). With the market saturated and federal governments, the City sought support for its and no buyers for the bonds, the city lacked an abili- agenda in the private sector, asking developers not for ty to raise capital to pay its existing debt and finance loans but to fund projects. This was a watershed mo- development. The city was insolvent but “avoided fil- ment in New York policy, at which time planners became ing for bankruptcy after the federal and state govern- mediators between public and private interests, priv- ments agreed to provide loans and other assistance ileging the latter to encourage development. “The old while the state began to oversee city finances, threat- arguments for planning had been comprehensiveness ening to intervene if unorthodox financial practices and reducing negative externalities .... The new claims reemerged” (Chronopoulos, 2017: 936). New York was were competitiveness and efficiency” (Fainstein, 2001: not alone. Across the country, major cities were de- 99). New York entered an era of property-led econom- claring bankruptcy. In response, “the lending commu- ic development. To provide its citizens with the services nity [had] become more demanding of municipalities they need and to encourage growth, the City began to to maintain a businesslike ledger sheet” (Hackworth produce conditions that attract private capital and real & Smith, 2001: 470). The financial crisis did more estate developers to build with the promise of their fi- than lead to budget oversight and austerity measures, nancial gain (Wolf-Powers, 2005). Land-use regulation however, it altered the way in which the city plans. was elemental to that strategy and remains so today.

Public to Property-led Process Proliferation of Highest and Best Use

Urban planning, prior to the 1970s, was interventionist The shift from an interventionist to a more market-ori- by nature, financing and developing projects with “an ented development policy meant New York needed to orientation to the long term, protection of the environ- incentivize the real estate sector to build. “Planners ment, and attention to the needs of all social groups” now spoke in the same language as investment bank- (Fainstein, 2001: 98). The city’s attempt to continue its ers, property brokers, and budget analysts” (Fainstein, direct support of plans in the face of waning federal 2001: 99), and central to that lexicon is the phrase and state monetary support certainly exacerbated the ‘highest and best use.’ The expression is succinct and financial problem or perhaps even helped catalyze the seemingly straightforward. ‘Highest’ is literal – encour- contemporary crisis. In its wake, however, New York lost aging tall buildings. ‘Best,’ however, is more ambig- command of its capital spending, forcing city planning uous. City officials may claim it is about whatever fits to become a reactive process. “Balancing budgets, im- in the context of the neighborhood. An assistant vice plementing cost-saving measures and financial plans, president of Real Estate Transaction Services at EDC, a and ensuring access to bond markets were to be pri- team responsible for promoting economic development oritized over all other governmental activities” (Brash, through neighborhood revitalization asserted, “We 2011: 33). Government devolve to a managerial bu- look for use that could be beneficial to the communi- reaucracy, overseeing the development proposals and ty as well as fitting with the City’s development vision” contracts, rather than actively shaping the cityscape. (Interview, 2019). Yet according to a vice president at a prominent New York-based private equity real estate The City, in theory, maintained its mantle of serving the firm, “Best is the use that will generate the highest public interest with a focus on employment, affordable rent” (Interview, 2019). Given that New York’s develop- housing, and economic development, yet the crisis did ment strategy defers to the private sector for growth, 10 regardless of what public officials may claim, ‘high- clusionary Housing, which requires developments in est and best use’ is a euphemism for most lucrative. upzoning to set aside a percentage of housing units at an affordable rate (New York City Council, 2019). Under the principle of highest and best use, rezon- While government has managed to provide public ing is fundamental to the City’s ability to stimulate services under the auspices of highest and best use, development and extract public benefit. If the City the principle underscores a continued state depend- identifies an area of land that is ‘under-utilized,’ the ence on the private sector to offset its own lack of City can push for a rezoning that will allow for tall- financial intervention and represents a seemingly er residential buildings. The rezoning will increase permanent shift urban governance. “Increasingly, the value of land and thus drive future construction. policy decisions are made within a neoliberal ideo- Although development is as of right in New York, logical framework in which urban space is mobilized meaning the land owner can build anything on the for market-oriented economic growth and elite con- plot as long as the plans are in compliance with the sumption practices” (Curran & Hanson, 2005: 464). underlying zoning, government still captures public benefit. Rezoning for luxury high-rise buildings gen- Accommodating the private sector through zoning erates more tax revenue for the City, with residential that encourages development may have been nec- property tax rate being higher than those ‘under-uti- essary if not prudent during a moment federal as- lized’ land, such as manufacturing or warehousing sistance was withdrawing and New York was in fi- (NYC Department of Finance, 2019). The City also nancial crisis. Today, however, circumstances have relies on economic incentives for public value. Au- changed, with the population no longer in decline thorizing tax abatements and subsidies for construct- and crime rates at a fifty year low, but the developing public space or affordable housing is common. ment strategy has not evolved since its nascence. In Past administrations from Koch to Bloomberg relied fact, the government has doubled-down on its dec- heavily on inclusionary zoning, which allowed de- ades-old approach to growth, actively rezoning large velopers to build higher in exchange for affordable portions of the city. During his 12-year tenure as housing units (Stabrowski, 2015). During Bill de Bla- mayor, Michael Bloomberg rezoned more than 40% sio’s mayorship, the City has adopted Mandatory In- of New York (Fessenden et al., 2013). After decades

Figure 3: Low-rise Auto Shops on Jerome Avenue

Source: Department of City Planning Zoning and Land Use Map 2019; Author's own annotation 11 of redevelopment of land closest to the central business was rezoned in 2005. The resolution changed the quali- district, most neighborhoods easily susceptible to being fied zoning from largely manufacturing to more residen- higher and better use have already been fully reinvested tial and mixed-use. According to a senior staff member (Hackworth & Smith, 2001), and the rezonings have ex- at SBS, “it’s not as though there was underutilized space. panded in greater concentration to the outer boroughs. It was space used for a use that didn’t complement the During the early aughts, waterfront properties in Brook- long-term plan of DCP” (Interview, 2019). Eventually, lyn and Queens, such as DUMBO, Williamsburg, Green- the strategy of highest and best use made its way to point, and Long Island City, experienced shifts in zoning. Jerome Avenue, a corridor replete with low-rise build- The areas were largely former manufacturing space that ings and limited occupants both in number and means. the City identified as under-utilized and were rezoned to accommodate high-density residential and commercial space (Angotti, 2017b). Even if the space is occupied by operating businesses, the City may still submit it for -re zoning because it identified a ‘higher and better’ use. For example, Greenpoint, a neighborhood in north Brooklyn

Figure 4: Jerome Avenue Rezoned Area in The Bronx

Source: Department of City Planning Zoning and Land Use Map 2019; Author's own annotation 12 Jerome Avenue er than the country’s average. The non-Hispanic Bronx, NY white inhabitants comprise less than 10% of the people. The diversity extends well beyond ethnic- As a long thoroughfare in the South Bronx, Jerome ity. Well more than half-a-million people living in Avenue is part of an area of the city that became the Bronx were born in foreign countries, making up infamous for suffering neglect and decay to such over 35% of the borough. Half of those individuals extent it was common practice for property own- have since received their citizenship. And nearly 9% ers to set fire to their buildings and collect - insur of the Bronx’s residents were born in Puerto Rico. ance money because the market value reached record lows. In the 1970s, the Bronx lost 36% of The borough is largely working class. With only 19% its housing stock and 40% of its population (Chro- of its residents completing university, it is far below nopoulos, 2017). After decades of slow recov- the national average at 33% and NYC at 36%. The ery, however, the Bronx is a different place. Crime disparity is even greater when excluding the north rates are lower than many major cities across the part of the borough, which is on average richer and United States, and the population has grown over whiter. Considering only the South Bronx, the figure 30% since 1980 (Chronopoulos, 2017). Yet the bor- drops to 12%. Although job growth has been steady, ough’s makeup still stands apart in many ways. the Bronx remains behind the city’s curve. Per capita income is on the rise for the whole of New York City, Bronx residents are extremely diverse. The black increasing an average 11% over the previous five and Hispanic populations account for more than years. Yet, the Bronx the growth rate is slower at 8.5% 43% and 56% respectively, which is nearly double (Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2018). And the bor- the ratio for the city as a whole and markedly larg- ough earns significantly less than the rest of the city. 13 In spite of their disadvantages, these working-class ty, with 42.3% of resident as foreign-born (DCP, 2019a). populations have fueled the Bronx’s economic recovery and growth. Now a borough of more Located in the southwest Bronx, just north of Yankee Sta- than 1.47 million residents, rich in diversity, the dium, the rezoned area includes 526 lots on 74 blocks. It Bronx has transformed into a place for investment. is largely characterized by low-rise buildings, such as pre- war residential, walk-ups and single-story commercial businesses, the most common of which are related to the automotive repair industry. DCP described the area as “underutilized and vacant land that largely serves as a service area for the dense surrounding residential neighborhoods” (DCP, 2018c: 19). In its study of Jerome Avenue, DCP further asserted the auto-related commercial uses disrupt the residential neighborhoods, giving the area a sense of spatial fragmentation (DCP, 2018d: 2-3). That assessment may be a matter of perspective predicated on housing as priority. Figure 7 shows the rezoned area with the previously permitted zoning. The blue lots represent C8-3 zoning, which allowed for heavily commercial use, including the auto repair uses. Together the lots form a nearly contiguous spine *Percentages will exceed 100 because White and Black & African Amer- along the avenue. Given the history and importance of ican are inclusive of Hispanic or Latino the local auto repair industry, the auto related industry Figure 5: Racial & Birth Country Demographics

Source: United States Census Bureau 2018; Chart: Author could be described as the backbone of Jerome Avenue.

Jerome Avenue's Makeup

In 2018, DCP received approval for altering the zoning code for large swaths of Jerome Avenue. Changing the permitted use of land and character of the buildings, it was 31st rezoning in the Bronx in 15 years (DCP, 2019b). Primarily impacting Community Districts 4 and 5, the affected area is home to 345,000 residents, some of the most vulnerable in the Bronx. The median income of the rezoned area is half that of the city and three-quarters of that of borough (see Figure 6), and the housing stock is predominantly rent-regulated. Over 80% of the mul- tifamily housing units constructed in the past decade in the corresponding Community Districts were subsidized affordable units (DCP, 2018a: 26). Comprising 66% of Figure 6: Jerome Avenue Median Income in Context the population, Hispanics are by far the largest ethnic Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis 2018; Chart: Author group in the area, followed by 29% black. Jerome Ave- nue also represents an incredible immigrant communi- 14 An Auto Industry Corridor

Automobiles dominated Jerome Avenue since their advent. The surrounding residential areas did not permit parking, so residents kept their vehicles on the nearby avenue. Over time, a service industry supporting those vehicles grew naturally. In 1961, the City codified the large swaths of the area’s technical zoning as C8-3, which is the bridge between commercial and manufacturing, allowing for uses like soldering, machinery repair, metal plating but also an extensive list of functions connected to the automobile repair industry (City of New York, 2004). The zoning coupled with the opening of the Cross-Bronx Expressway in 1955, which cuts underneath the avenue and would later become the nation’s most con- gested corridor (INRIX, 2017), all but assured the automotive industry’s connection with Jerome Avenue.

0.1 0.2 Miles Figure 7: Jerome Avenue Previous C8-3 Zoning There was never any formal planning of the auto Source: Department of City Planning 2019; Department of Small Business Services 2018; Author's owner annotation industry on Jerome Avenue, a fact reflected in the nature of the companies and employees. Most of the businesses have fewer than ten workers, 64% of whom are foreign-born and Spanish is their only language and 68% have only a high school diplo- ma or less (Pratt Center, 2017). Circumstance can make navigating government regulation difficult, and many of the businesses are operating illegally in some capacity. Some lack licenses to operate as auto shops, and of those that have licenses with the Department of Motor Vehicles, nearly half of them operate in buildings with an inaccurate Certificate of Occupancy (Pratt Center, 2017). According to a representative from SBS familiar with the matter, “We didn’t know how many businesses were operating legally. How many that had leases. How many of them had oral agreements” (Interview, 2019). What 0.1 0.2 Miles may give the best indication of the industry’s infor- Figure 8: Jerome Avenue Updated C8-3 Zoning mality is the number of businesses operating along Source: Department of City Planning 2019; Department of Small Business Services 2018; Author's own annotation Jerome Avenue. The City does not definitively know.

15 to other businesses as well as attract customers in need of related goods (Bronx Coalition, 2017). It is a tight network that is growing in number. Since 2010, the number of auto repair employees in the city has increased by 15% (Pratt Center, 2017). The industry also represents employment opportunity for many in the surrounding neighborhoods. The average an- nual pay for an employee of the auto repair job in Figure 9: Jerome Avenue Updated C8-3 Zoning NYC is around $44,000, and one fifth earn more than Source: Department of Small Business Services 2018; Author's own $60,000 (New York State Department of Labor, 2019). annotation Other job options for people of similar educational In its three-year study of the area, DCP identified 145 achievement commonly exist in retail or food prepa- auto-related businesses on what would be the rezoned ration. Not only do those jobs pay $20,000 a year less, block and lots. That is roughly 35% of the related indus- but they often have fewer available hours and, given try in the Bronx (DCP, 2018c: 28). This figure also refers their unskilled nature, lead to more insecure tenure. to businesses directly involved in the repair or sale of Particularly, for immigrant communities, the auto -re automobile services, which excludes gas stations and pair industry represents a chance at decent wages. parking – nearly 50 businesses. The state DMV, however, has only 138 auto-related industries listed, of which only 77 have active licenses (NY State Office of- Infor mation Technology Services, 2019). In its own study SBS identified 142 auto-related businesses (see Figure 10). The disconnect is a result of sharing space and subleas- ing. “From the outside, an auto repair business may ap- pear to be just that, one business engaged in fixing motor vehicles. On the inside however, a single auto repair shop may actually be home to multiple individual businesses” (Pratt Center, 2017: 6). Contract workers or businesses not on the primary lease agreement are difficult to calculate, making the DCP’s figure an estimate rather than a definitive count of the businesses. UAMA, asserts there are more than 200 such businesses on the Jerome Avenue corridor. The same uncertainty principle applies to the number of employees, which the City estimates around 600 while UAMA puts that number over 1,000.

In spite of the adversity, the auto industry along Jerome Figure 10: Auto Business Locations Source: Department of Small Business Services 2018; Author's own anno- Avenue is strong. With such a high concentration of re- tation lated businesses in a relatively small area, the auto industry along Jerome Avenue benefits from clustering, allowing businesses to cross sell products and services 16 The auto work on Jerome Avenue is also emblematic a greater density, we will. We are pro-zoning change. of a large portion of the United States labor market, It’s a business” (Interview, 2019). Maintaining the old which is low-paid, immigrant work (Moody, 2007). zoning would have been a check on developers and Grown out of informality, the auto-related industry allowed Jerome Avenue to continue supporting the came to dominate a corridor and not only provide auto industry and the needs of the growing number a livelihood for hundreds of people and their fami- of vehicles. Clawing back the C8-3 zoning to make lies but also provide a service for the city, a service way for residential and other commercial use seems that is rudimentary yet essential to the city’s trends. to neglect those employed by auto repair industry and the need for their service. Or was it the disrup- City Trends Related to the Industry tion and potential eradication of the auto repair The City’s rezoning of Jerome Avenue actively -de industry on Jerome Avenue a calculated decision? creases the available space for C8-3 uses, which includes the auto repair industry. It was a decision consistent with the larger citywide trend. In the past decade, the area of land zoned as C8-3 decreased by 10 million square feet and now comprises less than 1% of the land in five boroughs (Pratt Center, 2017). The continual reduction of available C8-3 land would be logical if the connected uses were growing lesser in demand or importance, yet motor vehicle ownership continually increased over the previous Figure 11: City Trend in Car Ownership ten years with the exception of a slight decline in the Source: Data: New York State DMV 2018; Graph: Author wake of the financial crisis. The city gained roughly 170,000 personal vehicles, representing a 10% growth. Though Brooklyn and Queens, the most populated boroughs, respectively have roughly two to three times, the number of registered vehicles than the other boroughs, the relative growth rates were consistent in all five (New York DMV, 2019). And as long as New Yorkers continue to register more vehicles, they need a sector to service them.

Land zoned for the auto industry, however, does not align with the city’s long-standing strategy of property-led development. Highest and best use is not an auto repair shop. When asked if the industry has a space in NYC, the vice president of a prominent New York-based private equity real estate firm replied, “No. The real estate market cares about the bottom line. How is an auto repair shop going to help the bottom line? If we’re able to buy the sites cheap and build to 17 Considerations or Lack Thereof community groups and Council Members for local improvements and housing, was one of the first studied. The Proposal and Adoption of Rezoning

As part of his campaign platform when running for may- In 2014, DCP embarked on a multifaceted process to un- or, de Blasio underscored the growing inequalities in derstand the nature of the area and the problems fac- the city and promised policy that would offer protec- ing its different neighborhoods. It created a task force tions for the more economically and socially insecure that involved representatives of various city agencies, New Yorkers (Angotti, 2017a). Increasing affordable such as the Department of Transportation, EDC, Hous- housing stock was and remains central to the mayor’s ing Preservation and Development, and SBS, as well as plans. Though he castigated the city’s decades-old neo- community stakeholders to identify the area’s primary liberal growth plan, which flourished under Bloomberg, needs and possible remediation strategies. Addition- “de Blasio looks to the real estate industry as a driving ally, DCP convened a planning team with communi- force in producing economic development and increas- ty board representatives, local advocates and elected ing housing supply” (Fainstein, 2018: 1269). Under his officials that would guide the government’s review leadership, the City scrutinized communities and land of the area to be in line with the community stake- across the five boroughs to identify 15 areas that offer holders’ goals and facilitate outreach (DCP, 2019c). opportunities for housing development through rezon- Balancing the different perspectives and interests of ing. In his fight against inequality, de Blasio empha- groups within the Jerome Avenue corridor is a challenge. sizes the importance of engaging communities in the To one resident in his mid-twenties, born and raised in policy decision process. Jerome Avenue, having been Burnside, working at a furniture store near Jerome, the previously examined by DCP and with calls from the area is “junk land” (Interview, 2019). To an autoworker, 18 it is a place of business and livelihood. The represent- It also acknowledged the existing zoning and land ative from SBS summarized the situation succinctly: use to be an impediment to realizing the community’s goals and creating vibrant neighborhood It’s a torn community. There’s a pocket of res- filled with mixed-use space. For example, in - refer idents who can’t find parking because auto ence to housing, DCP wrote, “In most of the study shops are taking up all the parking spaces. You area, existing zoning only allows for heavy com- have auto shops and workers who have been mercial and light industrial uses and does not per- here for decades, and they are fearful of losing mit residential development, although vacancy their jobs and craft. And you have people who rates in the area are significantly lower than the at the same time are facing a housing crisis and Bronx and NYC as a whole” (DCP, 2018b). For DCP think the neighborhood is not safe for them to to achieve the specified vision for the neighbor- raise their children because there are fumes hoods, the block and lots zoned C8-3, which allows everywhere and it’s not clean (Interview, 2019). for the auto-related work, would have to be altered.

Only after a year of study, community workshops, In hopes of better aligning the area’s zoning code open houses, and public meetings listening to and with the community’s goals, in 2017, the City re- grappling with the conflicting interests did the City leased a Neighborhood Action Plan that synthesized began to draft zoning changes and strategies, all while the various concerns and hopes of residents, busi- continuing public engagement. Council Member Gib- ness owners, and other community stakeholders. son of District 4 requested the public engagement The resulting zoning map would severely reduce the period be extended to garner more community in- C8-3 zoning, concentrating it in three preserved ar- puts. This marks a positive shift from previous rezon- eas. Among other changes, the zoning represents ing processes that did not involve the affected com- a loss of over 155,000ft2 of auto-related commerce munities until after the studies were well underway. space and over 120,000ft2 for garages (see Figure During the 2005 rezoning of Williamsburg, for exam- 12). The zoning map inserted high-rise residential ple, “There were many public meetings about the re- and mixed light-commercial use in their place. Un- zoning, but they were held after the rezoning propos- der the plan, Jerome Avenue stood to gain nearly 4 al was prepared by DCP” (DePaolo and Morse, 2017: million ft2 of residential space. While the City had 83). Throughout the Jerome Avenue process, DCP and planned affordable housing construction in the near- other responsible agencies consistently performed by residential areas, the preexisting C8-3 zoning, outreach and released information in both English unlike other commercial zoning, disallows for the and Spanish to accommodate the communities. construction of residential buildings. In the absence of zoning change DCP concluded, “Market-rate de- As a result of the out extensive outreach velopment is anticipated to be limited” (DCP, 2018c: with different stakeholders, DCP identi- 36). The decision to replace much of the C8-3 zoning fied the following development priorities: with different residential and commercial zones was • Access and Open Space; made through a confluence of factors, such as the

• Housing; community feedback. DCP explains the wide-rang- ing considerations made to determine the zoning • Economic & Workforce Development; and proposal in its Environmental Impact Statement • Community Resources (DCP, 2019c) (EIS), a 26-chapter evaluation of the costs and ben- 19 typically hold a hearing for public comment and make recommendations sent to the Borough President who can also comment on the proposal before the City Plan- ning Commission (CPC) reviews the potential change. CPC is a 13-person board with members appointed by the Mayor, Borough Presidents, and the Public Advocate, and the body can either reject the proposal or approve it with or without amendments to be further modified by or voted on by City Council. In March 2018, the City Council revised the original application, inserting options for Mandatory Inclusionary Housing, a move that aligns with an identified need by the local government representatives and the Mayor’s plans for New York. With the amendment, Council voted to approve the Je- rome Avenue Neighborhood plan, certifying changes to the zoning code. In spite of the public outreach efforts, the final plans left some dissatisfied and represented a complete upending of the auto worker community.

Zoning Out the Auto Industry

The long-term effects of the rezoning will not be clear for years. The purchase of land, planning, construction, and all of the social change that brings will take time. Many of the developments already proposed are identified as build year 2026 (DCP, 2018b), and the extent of their impact on the neighbor character will continue beyond that date. The rezoning’s consequence for Figure 12: Changes in Square Footage of Use the auto industry, however, is now, and it is substan- Source: Department of City Planning 2018e; Author's own annotation tial. Many of the auto related businesses have closed efits of the potential change. Covering topics from so- down or continue running with the threat of removal. cioeconomic conditions to air quality, the document is Since zoning code adjustments offer automatic grand- comprehensive and in-depth. To legally codify the zon- fathering for previously operating businesses who are ing change, however, the proposed changes had to re- not compliant with the new zoning, the City is not di- ceive approval through the Universal Land Use Review rectly forcing those businesses out. It is, however, com- Process (ULURP), a standardized multi-step apprais- plicit. The updated zoning offers higher and denser use, al of the proposed zoning amendments that includes which is more attractive to the real estate market. The different levels of government and public hearings. new residential zoning allows a developer to build up ULURP gives the public a final chance to address concerns to 225ft, roughly 20 stories, in some cases. The differ- over the plan and allows city officials to make amend- ence from the one to two story auto shops is stark and ments (see Appendix A). The local Community Boards presents a massive potential capital extraction for real 20 Figure 13: Auto Repair Shop Figure 15: Building Proposal 1

Source: Author Source: Department of City Planning 2019c

Figure 14: Shops Next to the Subway Tracks Figure 16: Building Proposal 2

Source: Author Source: Department of City Planning 2019c

estate developers. “Land values tend to change in ticipated in its multi-year evaluation of the corridor. unison with long cycles in the economy; they increase most rapidly during periods of particularly In the EIS, DCP explores the potential loss of au- rapid capital accumulation” (Smith, 1996: 58). In to- to-related business as a result of the rezoning. The tal, the rezoned area represents nearly a 4 million ft2 analysis concludes that the rezoning will not have gain in residential use (DCP, 2018a). Because of the a substantial impact on the auto industry. Yet the ability to build high and dense, land owners stand to evaluation could be characterized as convoluted. profit from selling to a developer. According to the In multiple instances the DCP asserts 36 auto busi- senior staff member at SBS, “Businesses that stay nesses will be displaced (DCP, 2018c). While at oth- at the infancy of a rezoning experience inflationary er points in the same text, the City walks back the pressures on commercial leases when they are being effect stating, “It is possible that existing business- renewed. They get priced out.” (Interview, 2019). For es could be directly displaced. However, such direct auto shops on Jerome Avenue, it started happening displacement would be subject to private contracts within the first year of the rezoning, a cost DCP an- and lease terms between tenants and landlords ex- 21 isting at the time of redevelopment” (DCP, 2018c: 21- bers disconnected. Mr. Estevez of UAMA stated to-date, 22). The language shifts in tone leaving room for uncer- “Over two dozen small auto-related businesses have tainty, but it reads more as though the City is trying to been displaced and over 85% of the rest have no lease at absolve itself of responsibility of business displacement. all” (Interview, 2019). While DCP claimed in the EIS that businesses would be able to move to other nearby clus- The assessment puts the potential displacement into ters, Mr. Estevez continued “There are no places availa- context of the borough and city. The EIS estimates the ble to relocate these businesses because every landlord displacement of 36 firms, reflects only six percent of from the adjacent places in the Bronx is connected to the related industry in the Bronx. It highlights the fact the ones on Jerome, and they don’t want any auto-re- the businesses are small, employing only 10 or fewer lated tenants on their properties at all. And if we find employees and furthers the point to suggest impact- anyone, the rent is through the roof” (Interview, 2019). ed businesses can relocate to another area zoned for This is the human cost of the property-led development auto work. The disaffected consideration for the autow- trend in NYC. Business owners have to terminate servic- orker community is summed up when DCP concludes es and employees cannot find work in the sector they with a typo, “Therefore, the displacement of these 16 know. “36” is not just a fraction of the auto businesses in automotive service and repair establishments (includ- the Bronx, it represents livelihood for hundreds of peo- ing repair, glass, and painting/detailing shops) is not ex- ple, hundreds of working-class immigrants. The rezoning pected to adversely affect local residents or businesses” dispossessed some of the city’s most insecure residents. (DCP, 2018c: 28). Contextualizing the potential disruption of business in the larger city ecosystem is a valid The prolonged and multifaceted outreach was meant to method to understand whether or not customers and not only understand the potential shock of a rezoning autoworkers will still have access to the industry’s ser- on the auto industry but also to identify possible - re vices, but it may have also been worth furthering the mediation methods for the negative impact. In the EIS, context by explaining in the evaluation that the City DCP discloses lengthy considerations for mitigation of is consistently clawing back on its C8 zoning, erasing environmental harm, yet not once does the document over 10 million square feet of C8-3 in the past decade, mention the auto industry or even small business more while the number of automobiles continues to grow. generally. SBS, however, conducted its own assessment of the commercial businesses along the Jerome Assessing the loss of business by a relative tally, howev- Avenue corridor. While the review considered com- er, not only discounts the economic value of clustering merce as a whole, the Agency did pay particular focus but reduces the impact to a statistical estimate, strip- to the auto industry, given its dominant presence on ping it bare of any human consequence. Numbers do not the ground. SBS surveyed the auto businesses to gauge capture the anger and sadness in the voice of the wom- their well-being and future needs. Identified by 42% of an from T&A Autoshop when asked if she or someone respondents, by far the most common request was for else from the shop had time to talk about the rezoning. real estate and lease assistance (SBS, 2018). With 95% Her words “Closed. Cerrado. Finished” were filled with a of the auto businesses renting their properties, that desolation that afflicts hundreds of autoworkers on- Je request is paramount to the industry’s existence as it rome Avenue (Interview, 2019). Long standing auto re- grapples with the rising land values after the rezoning. pair shops are going out of business. On the same block, La Isla Automobile Services, Nino’s Transmissions, New The assistance offered to the autoworkers in the wake Solution Automobile, all have their telephone num- of the rezoning, however, did not address the need 22 for lease protection. SBS does have a standing ers] are renting to retail stores and other denomina- program that offers commercial lease assistance tions of businesses not to auto repairs businesses” and connects them to legal representatives par- (Interview, 2019). Lots in use are being occupied by ticularly in cases of harassment, but that service’s the City, such as the Department of Sanitation, and ability to aid a fight against a legal rent increase is storage companies. Others remain vacant, hoping to tenuous at best. Instead, the City offered a hand- sell. Moreover, there is no future protection against ful of assistance programs to the auto industry: additional zoning amendments. Property owners can petition the CPC for adjusted zoning on their lots. • Preservation of C8-3 zoning; Five years after the 2005 Williamsburg rezoning, for example, the City approved a petition that changed • Auto Business Compliance and Retention; a preserved manufacturing zone to residential use.

• Relocation Grant Fund; and And now, there is talk about another rezoning along the waterfront to allow for different business use. So • Workforce Training Programs even if the retained C8-3 zones were leased to the auto industry, there is no guarantee for the future. Assistance Programs

Along Jerome Avenue, DCP preserved four areas for With the shift toward residential use, New York State the continuation of existing businesses, one reserved is pushing its Operation Eco-Quality Program, which for manufacturing, the other zoned C8-3. This reten- provides greater oversight and regulation of small tion zone is roughly 400,000ft2 and was created as a to mid-sized regulated facilities from violating state response to the calls from businesses that expressed conversation laws. The State wants to ensure the a wish to stay and expand. Maintaining C8-3 zoning, projected growing population is protected from any however, does not guarantee security of tenancy for harmful byproduct from the C8-3 businesses. The City the autoworkers. While many uses related to C8-3 is working to implement a compliance program to zoning are related to the auto industry, the zoning help businesses avoid infractions and punitive meas- code permits some other commerce, such as animal ures so they can remain open. Given, that the land- hospitals, laundry & dry-cleaning services, and trade lords seem to be ending the leases or pricing tenants schools for adults (City of New York, 2004). There is out, the program feels more like a hollow measure. no legal protection for the auto industry that would As acknowledged in the EIS, the City understands encourage land lords to lease their space for auto there will be displacement. In response, SBS created work as opposed to the other uses, which may in fact a $1.5 million relocation grant program that provides be more congruent with the mixed-use, residential up to $20,000 to businesses for moving expenses and commercial corridor DCP imagined in the rezon- should they decide to relocate somewhere else in ing. Some of those businesses may be able to outbid New York City. To date, there have been no partici- the auto industry for rent. “Unsustainable increases pants. The informal nature of the businesses, how- in rent prices led to change in the landscape of the ever, made eligibility difficult to determine and dif- small business community through closures and re- ficult to attain for many of the businesses who are locations of small business” (Williams and Needham, on illegal subleases, lack the proper C of O, or do not 2016: 6). And that is what is happening. According to possess a valid license. “If we get 10 companies that Mr. Estevez of UAMA, “Not one business can be relo- are eligible I’ll be surprised,” stated the SBS repre- cated to those so called reserved space. [Land own- 23 sentative familiar with the program (Interview, 2019). Even those who are eligible may not participate, given landlords seem reticent to lease to the auto industry on the scarce C8-3 zoned lots. And if any are able to relocate, the businesses may lose the economic benefit clustering provided on Jerome Avenue. According to a senior staff member at SBS, “[The City] creates the relocation programs as a politically expedient way to ameliorate complaints from businesses, regardless Figure 17: Vertical Auto Merchant Building of whether or not the City thought it would be a true Source: United Auto Merchants Association 2017 cure - and they weren’t. The City just standardly does this” (Interview, 2019). This formulaic approach to mitigation suggests a limited consideration for the unique circumstance of the auto workers and their craft.

New York autoworkers, however, have proven them- selves to be resilient and innovative in facing subopti- mal support from the City. Under the Bloomberg admin- istration, DCP rezoned Willets Point in Queens, similarly Figure 18: SBS Outreach on Jerome Avenue to Jerome Avenue, from an auto repair corridor to make Source: Department of Small Business Services 2019c way for higher and better use. Dozens of the dispossessed businesses formed a collective to combine relo- businesses along Jerome Avenue did not hear about cation grant money and invest in a workers’ cooperative the rezoning through a City representative. For exam- in the Bronx. Representing 45 businesses from Willets ple, a Spanish-speaking mechanic from M&D Auto Body Point, the cooperative was able to garner additional in- Repair on Jerome said that the business was never ap- vestment capital through law suit against the City and proached by the government. He found out about the developers. Yet development proved longer than ex- rezoning through UAMA (Interview, 2019). Admittedly, pected, cost overruns and pressure from the landlord, SBS representatives claim it is difficult to engage with forced the group to abandon the initiative (Bagli, 2016). the auto workers. Even going door to door, workers In a similar vein, during the Jerome Avenue outreach were reticent to speak with city employees unless ac- process, UAMA proposed creating a vertical auto mer- companied by a known entity like a Council Member chants building, but Mr. Estevez said the City rejected or community advocate (Interview, 2019). A SBS rep- the plans (see Figure 17). The Jerome Avenue auto work- resentative, articulated an unfortunate consequence: ers are left with the standard grant relocation program. A lot of the businesses don’t understand SBS also made workforce training services available not what’s coming. Even with the relocation funds, only for their current trade but also something new what’s it good for if the businesses don’t com- – a sign the City is conscious of the loss of livelihood. prehend what’s at stake. They don’t com-

Although SBS is conducting outreach to make busi- prehend the economic impact it will have nesses aware of the grant, there remains a question of on the area or that they’re going to have to its efficacy in contacting the community. Many of the start from the beginning (Interview, 2019). 24 This is largely an immigrant community that built up its industry and livelihood while being ignored by the government for decades. A sudden onslaught of Agency representatives is naturally met with skepticism, even if they are there to help. The government was responsible for the rezoning that created hostile business environment for the auto industry. Can the same government expect a community to trust representatives from one Agency while another brought its dispossession? “You don’t really know a community, unless you’re from there. You can’t speak to what you think the community needs without really experiencing it” stated a Bronx resident (Interview, 2019). The City needs to better partner with local actors for outreach, particularly in a low-income and immigrant business community. And that task is hard. Even with known entities liaising with businesses, people do not have the time. “The community is there working 7 days a week, 14 hours a day” said Mr. Estevez (Interview, 2019). Consequently, the City’s attempts to provide services, which do not reflect the autoworkers’ goals, have yielded limited results.

25 Zoning for 'a Just City' The decision to rezone Jerome Avenue was a product of a multi-year review, involving a wide range of con- Jerome Avenue reveals the effects of New York’s regime siderations not the least of which being stakeholder of property-led development and using rezoning as a opinions. During the environmental assessment, the mechanism for growth. Whole industries can get left City reached out to community members and repre- behind and the employees dispossessed. The autow- sentatives of different interest groups. And as requested orkers of Jerome Avenue stand as evidence that in spite by Council Member Gibson, in whose district many of of the City’s stakeholder outreach, the result is not as the businesses operate, the public engagement period inclusive as preexisting pluralism. In defining her- the was extended so as to capture more public sentiment ory of ‘the just city,’ the urban planning scholar Susan on the nature of the neighborhood and its future. This Fainstein explains that urban governance has prioritized process embodies the communicative theory of plan- economic growth as the leading objective, a decision ning in which planners serve as mediators between all that privileges policies that create the greatest good for of the stakeholders, listening to their concerns and fa- the greatest number (2001). Guided by a utilitarian prin- cilitating a negotiation for development decisions (Hea- ciple, urban development allows for losing actors, such ley, 1992). The communicative theorists focus on the as Jerome Avenue’s auto industry. As a rejection of that process and ensure all interests are represented, but in outcome, Fainstein develops a concept of urban justice, practice, the result may not reflect all of the stakehold- which she understands “as encompassing equity, de- ers’ concerns. There are issues in which interests are di- mocracy, and diversity and to argue that its influence vergent and intractable, making consensus impossible. should bear on all public decisions” (2001, 5). For rezon- Allowing for higher and better use in spite of industry ing, ‘justice’ is a question of both process and outcome. displacement is an example. As DCP did on Jerome Av-

26 enue, communicative planners will engage the vari- ter – operating within the existing political economy ous stakeholders but at points of impasse the result – and find way to better the circumstance of those will favor the utilitarian outcome. Stakeholder - en at the bottom (Fainstein, 2010). Planners must con- gagement reflects democratic principle of Fainstein’s front the power dynamics and choose policies that definition of ‘justice,’ but in focusing on the process, favor low-income and minority groups. In rezoning it can sacrifice equity (2010). In the 2018 rezoning, Jerome Avenue, however, planners at DCP relied on the City listened to the autoworkers’ interests along a cost-benefit analytic framework that yielded to with those of residents, community groups, and the market to provide supposedly the greatest good elected officials. Ultimately, however, the rezon- for the greatest number. For the working-class, im- ing offered few protections for the auto industry. migrant employees of the auto industry, the result was a policy of neglect subjecting them to a slow For just city theory, the democratic and inclusive and indirect violence against their livelihood, forced nature of the process is important but the driving out from the pressures of rising land values. While consideration is an outcome that is both socially and “state agencies can shape a new retail landscape economically equitable (Fainstein, 2010). A disparity with economic development policies, zoning chang- in the socioeconomic circumstance of the stakehold- es, and policing strategies” (Zukin et al., 2009: 49), ers is not remedied through representation alone. not many governments defend preexisting local busi- There must be an intentional effort to prioritize equi- ness. In the context of market driven development, ty in the result, which was not the case in the case of the best real protection for vulnerable businesses is Jerome Avenue. A representative from DCP stated, “The Mayor’s priority is housing, and he’s doubled down on it with MIH” (Interview, 2019), a fact that is reflected in the intensification of residential use on amended zoning map. As explained in the EIS, the City concluded that housing, access & open space, as well as economic development are the goals that best serve the Jerome Avenue corridor. The actu- Figure 19: Proposal of aResidential Building with Affordable Units alization of those goals includes “the development Source: Department of Small Business Services 2019c of vibrant, mixed-use buildings with active ground floors that promote retail continuity and a consistent streetscape, with a wide variety of local retail and services to support the surrounding neighborhoods…and the facilitation of new open space to serve areas residents and workers” (DCP, 2018a: 25). The explicit goal, which portends gentrification and presents a direct disruption and displacement of the auto business, could be characterized as utilitarian Figure 20: Proposal of a School on Jerome Avenue Source: Department of Small Business Services 2019c and not as what Fainstein would describe as ‘just.’

To plan for justice, the aim cannot be for an egali- tarian result. It must take on a non-reformist charac- 27 land ownership, yet fewer than 5% of the auto business- the benefits of rezoning, albeit tempered, that would es are free of landlords. If the City prioritized a sense not dispossess either residents or the autoworkers. of justice in the rezoning, rather than offering the businesses funds to move, it could have helped them pur- Justice in planning, however, is not merely a matter of chase the land or purchase a piece land on their behalf ensuring democracy and equity for the stakeholders in and created a denser use similar to UAMA’s proposal. the area immediately impacted. The scale and structure of power enabling the dispossession goes beyond lo- Part of rezoning’s failure in protecting vulnerable busi- cal and even national authority. The political economic ness communities is that the process is race blind paradigm driving development and subsequently rezon- (Morse, 2017). The considerations of the rezoning pro- ings like Jerome Avenue is ruled through policy defer- posal and the review process were primarily driven ence to the market. Because the real estate industry’s through the lens of economic development and the focus is profit extraction from any given development provision of housing. DCP did identify the class and ra- project, New York demonstrates no comprehensive or cial makeup of the autoworker community but made coordinated strategy. DCP does not actively track city- no effort to understand the demographic impact of the wide trends in available zoning types (Interview, 2019). land use change. Rezoning is a powerful tool that could As long as the City relies on the private sector for de- have been employed to for justice, to preserve the co- livering public assets like affordable housing, rezoning hesion and sense of belonging that auto industry pro- will operate on a localized scale with a short-term fo- vides to a large number of immigrants. Instead it was cus. Areas like Jerome Avenue will be devoid of the old complicit in their displacement. If applied, Fainstein’s industry and replaced with ‘vibrant,’ ‘mixed-use’ light theory of justice in the City would have brought the commercial and residential space, but this principle, auto industry and its workers to the fore and proffered applied repeatedly, can create diseconomies for a city a result that would have been more equitable for them. as a whole in the long term (Wolf-Powers, 2005: 381). Zoning for justice could protect the inimitable nature The just city theory, however, would not have been a of business corridors like Jerome Avenue, and in do- panacea for the auto industry as the low-income and ing so, ensure the city ecosystem is better balanced. minority interests are not aligned. Between gas emissions and toxic paint fumes, the auto industry does present health risks to the residents of the area, all of whom are of similar socioeconomic and racial demographics. A local resident noted, “When I walk along the Avenue, I feel hungover from the fumes” (Interview, 2019). Even if the City intervened as it is now to get the auto industry in compliance with the State emission standards, protecting land for their interests would de- tract from availability to construct new and commercial ventures that would accommodate the growing population. Though Fainstein fails to directly identify how to reconcile the conflicting interests of the more vulnerable communities, the City could still pursue justice in seeking a compromise that could better distribute 28 Conclusion government representatives, the study revealed New York’s development occurs in a neoliberal Rezoning means change. And for Jerome Avenue its framework, in which the City relies on the private one, not only of land use and building form, but of sector to finance construction and confer public ben- identity. Through amending the regulatory code on efit. The pretense for development is a power para- scores of blocks and hundreds of lots, the City ef- digm of financialization. On-the-ground change finds fectively zoned out the auto repair industry, which, its motivation in the synergy of the government’s despite its shortcomings, dominated Jerome Avenue strategic goals and the potential capital extraction and provided security and livelihood to hundreds of for the real estate industry. For Jerome Avenue that people for decades. The new residential and commer- translates to affordable housing and high residential cial use will certainly change the corridor’s physical buildings with commercial ground floor space. The structure and social fabric for years to come, but the resulting map leaves little footprint for the auto in- change for autoworkers has been more immediate. dustry, which exposes a disconnect between pro-

This study sought to understand the nature of the cess and outcome of Jerome Avenue’s rezoning. change for the auto industry because of its histor- In reviewing government considerations and inter- ic importance to the corridor. Moreover, although viewing members of the auto community, the study there is ample literature around policy’s role in ur- found auto businesses were consulted during the ban development and subsequent dispossession, deliberation of the rezoning and development of this case offered an opportunity to orient it around the City’s neighborhood plan. Some advocates for labor and the kind of workforce the city envisions. the auto industry were calling for no rezoning un- In relying on academic literature and interview with less their industry was protected. Others asked for 29 the creation of a multi-business auto building as a way plified in the case of Jerome Avenue, is the failure to bal- of preserving their trade. Yet the resulting strategy did ance growth and equitable distribution of benefits. It is not reflect their interests. Instead, the neighborhood an issue of value. The livelihoods of hundreds of autow- plan offers limited funds to relocate away from the av- orkers are of little value to the real estate industry. To enue, workforce training that could be in a new field. an auto business owner, what value is affordable hous- The offerings do not reflect the unique precarity of ing when he stands to lose his job? To a middle-aged those in the Jerome auto community nor deliver sub- mechanic, what value is job training for an industry that stantive protection from the market. The politics of may pay less money and offer less security? What is land use involves the collision of sectoral stakeholders, the value in protecting the interests of some commu- such as the auto and real estate industry, with spatial- nities and not others? The political and economic pre- ly defined interests (Fainstein & Fainstein, 1987), yet in tense in which rezonings occur is not likely to change practice the resolution bends toward that which can -of soon, but the City could have done better for the auto fer greater public good on behalf of the government. industry and can do better for all New Yorkers. If government considers New York’s most insecure, actively The City Comptroller stated in a recent interview, “The aims to better their circumstance, and does so not at people want growth. They also want equity” (What’s the expense of another vulnerable population, rezon- the [Data] Point?, 2019). The current development ing could be one tool used as step toward a just city. strategy could achieve both ends but only with great care. New York City is situated in a difficult political and economic power nexus. With the state and federal governments maintaining a decades-long avoidance of direct investment, the City focuses on leveraging the interests of the real estate lobby to exact its own aims. In rezoning Jerome Avenue, the City unlocked potential profit for developers by allowing them to build higher and denser, while also stipulating the reservation of units for affordable housing. The public benefits extract- ed from the private sector can be significant, but the policy must speak to the goals of those providing the services. Mayor de Blasio has continued the legacy of his predecessors, by setting priorities that can benefit developers, with affordable housing and economic development being primary among them. For New Yorkers like the autoworkers on Jerome Avenue, whose interests offer limited to no profit for financiers, the City’s development strategy can threaten their existence.

Zoning regulation can be effective defense, but the -pro cess to amend it needs to do more for those like the autoworkers than just consider. It needs to account for them in the outcome. The flaw with rezoning, as exem- 30 References City of New York (2004) Zoning Resolution: Appendix A Index of Uses. Department of City Planning. Avail- Angotti, T. (2017a) Introduction. In: Angotti, T. & able from: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/ Morse, S. (eds.) Zoned Out! Race, Displacement, and download/pdf/zoning/zoning-text/appendixa.pdf City Planning in New York City. New York, NY, Terre- [Accessed 20 May 2019]. form, Inc., pp. 10-16. City of New York (2019) Uniform Land Use Review Angotti, T. (2017b) Land Use and Zoning Matter. In: Procedure (ULURP). Department of City Planning. Angotti, T. & Morse, S. (eds.) Zoned Out! Race, Dis- Available from: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/plan- placement, and City Planning in New York City. New ning/download/pdf/applicants/applicant-portal/lur. York, NY, Terreform, Inc., pp. 18-45. pdf [Available 6 July 2019].

Bagli, C. (6 October 2016). Auto Shop Owners Curran, W. & Hanson, S. (2005) Getting Globalized: Forced Out of Willets Point Struggle to Rebuild in Urban Policy and Industrial Displacement in Wil- the Bronx. The New York Times. Available from: liamsburg, Brooklyn. Urban Geography. 26 (6), 461- https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/07/nyregion/ 482, Available from: https://doi.org/10.2747/0272- auto-shop-owners-forced-out-of-willets-point-strug- 3638.26.6.461 [Accessed 29 May 2019]. gle-to-rebuild-in-the-bronx.html [Accessed 5 August 2019]. DePaolo, P. & Morse, S. (2017) Williamsburg: Zoning Out Latinos. In: Angotti, T. & Morse, S. (eds.) Zoned Brash, J. (2003) Invoking Financial Crisis: Moral Out! Race, Displacement, and City Planning in New Discourse and Politics in New York City. Social Text. York City. New York, NY, Terreform, Inc., pp. 72-95. 21 (3), 59-83. Available from: https://muse.jhu.edu/ article/47176 [Accessed 6 May 2019]. Fainstein, N. & Fainstein, S. (1987). Economic Restructuring and the Politics of Land Use Planning Brash, J. (2011) Bloomberg’s New York: Class and in New York City. Journal of the American Planning Governance in the Luxury City. Athens, GA, Universi- Association. 53 (2), 237-248. Available from: https:// ty of Georgia Press. doi.org/10.1080/01944368708976658 [Accessed 29 May 2019]. Bronx Coalition for Community Vision (2017) Out of Gas: How the City Can Do Better for Jerome Ave- Fainstein, S. (2001) The City Builders: Property nue’s Auto Workers. New York, NY, Pratt Center for Development in New York and London, 1980 – 2000. Community Development. Available from: https:// 2nd edition, Revised. Lawrence, KS, University Press prattcenter.net/sites/default/files/jerome_auto_re- of Kansas. port_out_of_gas_10-10-17_we.pdf [Accessed 12 June 2019]. Fainstein, S. (2010) The Just City. Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press. Bureau of Economic Analysis (2018) Local Area Personal Income. U.S. Department of Commerce. Fainstein, S. (2018) Resilience and justice: planning Available from: https://www.bea.gov/system/ for New York City. Urban Geography. 39 (8), 1268- files/2018-11/lapi1118_0.pdf [Accessed 28 July 1275. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/0272 2019]. 3638.2018.1448571 [Accessed 22 June 2019].

Chronopoulos, T. (2017) The Rebuilding of the Fessenden, F., Giratikanon, T., Kelley, J., Tse, A., South Bronx after the Fiscal Crisis. Journal of Urban Wallace, T., Watkins, D., White, J. & Yourish, K. (18 History. 43 (6), 932-959. Available from: https://doi. August 2013) Reshaping New York. The New York org/10.1177/0096144217714764 [Accessed 27 June Times. Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/ 2019]. newsgraphics/2013/08/18/reshaping-new-york/index.html [Accessed 10 May 2019].

31 Hackworth, J. & Smith, N. (2001) The Changing State of New York City Department of City Planning (2018c) Gentrification. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Jerome Avenue Rezoning Environmental Impact State- Geografie. 92 (4), 464-477. Available from: https:// ment Chapter 3: Socioeconomic Conditions. New York doi.org/10.1111/1467-9663.00172 [Accessed 30 May City Department of City Planning. Available from: 2019]. https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/ applicants/env-review/jerome-avenue/03_feis.pdf?r=1 Healey, P. (1992) Planning through Debate: The Com- [Accessed 15 June 2019]. municative Turn in Planning Theory. The Town Planning Review. 63(2), 143-162. Available from: https://doi. New York City Department of City Planning (2018d) org/10.3828/tpr.63.2.422x602303814821 [Accessed 27 Jerome Avenue Rezoning Environmental Impact State- July 2019]. ment Chapter 18: Neighborhood Character. New York City Department of City Planning. Available from: Heathcott, J. (2015) The bold and the bland: Art, rede- https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/ velopment and the creative commons in post-industrial pdf/applicants/env-review/jerome-avenue/18_feis.pdf New York. City analysis of urban trends, culture, theory, [Accessed 20 June 2019]. policy, action. 19 (1), 79-101. Available from: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2014.991171 [Accessed New York City Department of City Planning (2018e) 30 May 2019]. Jerome Avenue Rezoning Environmental Impact State- ment Chapter 20: Expanded Rezoning Area Alternative. INRIX Research (2017) INRIX Global Traffic Score- New York City Department of City Planning. Available card. Available from: https://media.bizj.us/view/ from: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/down- img/10360454/inrix2016trafficscorecarden.pdf [Ac- load/pdf/applicants/env-review/jerome-avenue/20b_ cessed 14 July 2019]. feis.pdf?r=1 [Accessed 21 June 2019].

Moody, K. (2007) From Welfare State to Real Estate: New York City Department of City Planning (2019a) Regime Change in New York City 1974 to the Present. Community District Profiles: Bronx Community District New York, NY, The New Press. 4. Available from: https://communityprofiles.planning. nyc.gov/bronx/4 & https://communityprofiles.plan- Morse, S. (2017) Williamsburg: Harlem: Displacement, ning.nyc.gov/bronx/5 [Accessed 21 July 2019]. Not Integration. In: Angotti, T. & Morse, S. (eds.) Zoned Out! Race, Displacement, and City Planning in New New York City Department of City Planning (2019b) York City. New York, NY, Terreform, Inc., pp. 96-121. Initiatives: Bronx. Available from: https://www1.nyc. gov/site/planning/plans/bronx.page [Accessed 15 July New York City Council (2019) Mandatory Inclusionary 2019]. Housing. Available from: https://council.nyc.gov/land- use/plans/mih-zqa/mih/ [Accessed 10 July 2019]. New York City Department of City Planning (2019c) Jerome Avenue Neighborhood Plan: Progress to Date New York City Department of City Planning (2018a) March 2019. Available from: https://www1.nyc.gov/ Jerome Avenue Rezoning Environmental Impact State- assets/planning/download/pdf/plans-studies/je- ment Chapter 1: Project Description. New York City rome-ave/jerome-avenue-progress-to-date.pdf [Ac- Department of City Planning. Available from: https:// cessed 10 May 2019]. www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/applicants/env-review/jerome-avenue/01_feis.pdf?r=1 New York City Department of City Planning (2019d) [Accessed 12 June 2019]. PLACES Jerome Avenue Neighborhood Plan. Available from: https://www1.nyc.gov/site/planning/plans/je- New York City Department of City Planning (2018b) rome-ave/jerome-ave-rezoning.page [Accessed 5 June Jerome Avenue Rezoning Environmental Impact State- 2019]. ment Chapter 2: Land Use, Zoning, and Public Policy. New York City Department of City Planning. Available New York City Department of City Planning (2019e) from: https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/planning/down- New York City’s Zoning and Land Use Map. Available load/pdf/applicants/env-review/jerome-avenue/02_ from: https://zola.planning.nyc.gov/ [Accessed 15 July feis.pdf [Accessed 13 June 2019] 2019]. 32 New York City Department of Finance (2019) United States Census Bureau (2018) Quick Facts. Property Tax Rates. Available from: https://www1. Available from: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/ nyc.gov/site/finance/taxes/property-tax-rates.page fact/table/bronxcountybronxboroughnewyork,US/ [Accessed 17 July 2019]. PST045218 [Accessed 1 August 2019].

New York City Small Business Services (2018) Neigh- What’s the [Data] Point? (2019) Episode 76: $3.2 bil- borhood 360o Jerome Avenue the Bronx: Commercial lion, with NYC Comptroller Scott Stringer. [Podcast] District Needs Assessment. Available from: https:// 3 July. Available from: https://cbcny.org/podcast/ www1.nyc.gov/assets/sbs/downloads/pdf/neigh- episode-76-32-billion-nyc-comptroller-scott-stringer borhoods/n360-cdna-jerome.pdf [Accessed 18 July [Accessed 4 July 2019]. 2019]. Williams, T. & Needham, C. (2016) Transforma- New York State Department of Labor (2019) Oc- tion of a City: Gentrification’s Influence on the cupational Wages. Available from: https://labor. Small Business Owners of Harlem, New York. ny.gov/stats/lswage2.asp [Accessed 22 July 2019]. SAGE Open. 6 (4), 1-8. Available from: https://doi. org/10.1177/2158244016673631 [Accessed 12 June New York State Department of Motor Vehicles 2019]. (2019) Statistical Data and Summaries. Available from: https://dmv.ny.gov/about-dmv/statisti- Wolf-Powers, L. (2005) Up-Zoning New York City’s cal-summaries [Accessed 1 August 2019]. Mixed-Use Neighborhoods: Property-Led Econom- ic Development and the Anatomy of a Planning New York State Office of Information Technology Dilemma. Journal of Planning Education and Re- Services (2019) Vehicle Repair Shops Across New search. 24 (3), 379-393. Available from: https://doi. York State. Available from: https://data.ny.gov/ org/10.1177/0739456X04270125 [Accessed 19 June Transportation/Vehicle-Repair-Shops-Across-New- 2019]. York-State/icjc-x44x [Accessed 15 July 2019]. Zukin, S. (2010) Naked city: The death and life of Pratt Center for Community Development (2017) authentic urban places. Oxford, UK, Oxford Univer- Under the Hood: A Look Into New York City’s Auto sity Press. Repair Industry. New York, NY, Pratt Center for Community Development. Available from: https:// Zukin, S., Trujillo, V., Frase, P., Jackson, D., Recuber, prattcenter.net/research/under-hood-look-new- T. & Walker, A. (2009) New Retail Capital and Neigh- york-citys-auto-repair-industry-0 [Accessed 11 June borhood Change: Boutiques and Gentrification 2019]. in New York City. City & Community. 8 (1), 47-64. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540- Smith, N. (1996) The New Urban Frontier: Gentrifi- 6040.2009.01269.x [Accessed 2 July 2019]. cation and the revanchist city. London, Routledge.

Stabrowski, F. (2015) Inclusionary Zoning and Ex- clusionary Development: The Politics of ‘Affordable Housing’ in North Brooklyn. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 39 (6), 1120-1136. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468- 2427.12297 [Accessed 2 July 2019].

United Auto Merchants Association (2017) Vertical Auto Merchants Building (VAMB). Available from: http://uamanys.org/vertical-auto-merchants-building-vamb/ [Accessed 2 August 2019].

33 Appendix A

Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP)

CITY MAP BOROUGH CHANGES DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING COMMUNITY PRESIDENT and CITY PLANNING MAPS OF Application and Pre-Certification BOARD BOROUGH BOARD COMMISSION SUBDIVISIONS PLATTINGS ZONING MAP • Receives application and • Notifies public. • BP submits • Holds public hearing. CHANGES related documents. recommendation CPC SPECIAL • Holds public to CPC or waives • Approves, modifies PERMITS • Forwards application and documents hearing. right to do so. or disapproves REVOCABLE within 5 days to CB, BP, and CC application. CONSENTS (and BB, if project affects more than • Submits • BB (if project FRANCHISE RFP'S one CB). recommendation affects more than • Files approvals and MAJOR to CPC, BP (and BB). one CB) may hold approvals with CONCESSIONS • Certifies application as complete. a public hearing modifications with NON-CITY PUBLIC Can waive rights and submit City Council. IMPROVEMENTS • on franchise recommendation HOUSING AND RFP's and leases. to CPC or waive Disapprovals are URBAN RENEWAL • PLANS right to do so. final, except for zoning map changes, LANDFILLS special permits, and DISPOSITION OF urban renewal plans. REAL PROPERTY SEE FLOW CHART ACQUISITION OF BELOW FOR THE REAL PROPERTY PROCESS FOR SITE SELECTION CITY COUNCIL No Specified Time Limit (after 6 months, PROCESS AND MAYORAL applicant or BP in some cases, may 60 Days 30 Days 60 Days REVIEW (Charter TAKES appeal to CPC for certification). Section 197-d)

Clock = 1 Year

TOTAL DAYS 60 Days 90 Days 150 Days

AFTER CPC APPROVES APPLICATION CITY COUNCIL MAYOR CITY COUNCIL

• AUTOMATIC REVIEW BY CITY COUNCIL: • Can review application, • Reviews application. • May override Zoning map changes hold a public hearing, and Mayor's veto by vote to approve, approve with Zoning text changes (non-ULURP) • May veto Council action. 2/3 vote. Housing and urban renewal plans modifications, or disapprove. Disposition of residential buildings (except to • Refers any proposed • If Council does not act non-profit companies for low-income housing) modifications to CPC for an (or does not assume 197-a plans** additional 15-day review. jurisdiction on items it must elect to review), may veto • “TRIPLE NO”—AUTOMATIC REVIEW BY COUNCIL • If Council does not act OF ITEMS IN ELECTIVE LIST (BELOW), IF: CPC decision. (or does not assume jurisdic- CB recommended disapproval (NO #1) tion on items it must elect to BP recommended disapproval (NO #2) review), CPC decision is final. BP files objection with Council and CPC within 5 days of CPC approval (NO #3)

l• CITY COUNCIL MAY ELECT TO REVIEW: Action requires City map changes majority vote. Maps of subdivisions or plattings 5 Days 10 Days CPC special permits Revocable consents, franchise RFP's, and major Must assume jurisdiction concessions within 20 days. Non-City public improvements Does not include 15 day review for proposed modifications. Landfills Action requires * majority vote. Disposition of commercial or vacant property ** Refer to the “Rules for the Processing of Plans Pursuant to Disposition of residential buildings to nonprofit Charter Section 197-a” and the “197-a Plan Technical Guide” companies for low income housing 50 Days* for 197-a Plan Review timeline. Acquisition of real property Site selection ABBREVIATIONS: IF CPC DISAPPROVES APPLICATION, ALL ITEMS ARE DEFEATED EXCEPT Action requires 2/3 vote. DCP = Department of City Planning Action is final. CPC = City Planning Commission SPECIAL PERMITS, if Mayor certifies as necessary 50 Days ZONING MAP AND TEXT CHANGES, if Mayor CB = Community Board certifies as necessary Action requires 3/4 vote. BP = Borough President 197-a PLANS, if Mayor requests approval** Action is final. Law and timetable CC = City Council URBAN RENEWAL PLANS, Per State Law. to be revised. BB = Borough Board Source: City of New York 2019

34 Appendix B Interview Information and Schedules

Category Organization Interviewee Date (MM/DD/YYYY) Method Location

07/22/19 Telephone N/A United Auto Merchants Pedro Estevez, Non-Profit Associate President/Founder 07/23/19 Email N/A

08/06/19 Email N/A

Public Sector Department of City Planning Representative 07/04/19 In Person London Assistant Vice President of Economic Development Real Estate Transaction Public Sector Corporation Services 05/24/19 Telephone N/A

Department of Small 03/20/19 In Person Manhattan Public Sector Business Services Representative 07/01/19 Telephone N/A Department of Small Public Sector Business Services Senior Staff Member 05/30/19 Telephone N/A NY Private Equity Real Real Estate Estate Firm Vice President 07/14/19 Telephone N/A Local resident in his mid- Resident N/A twenties 03/20/19 In Person Bronx Local resident in his early Resident N/A thirties 03/20/19 In Person Bronx

Small Business Auto Repair Shop Mechanic 03/20/19 In Person Bronx

Small Business Automotive Audio Store Cashier 07/03/19 Telephone N/A

Small Business Auto Repair Shop Owner 07/10/19 Telephone N/A