By Chris Kok

The Newark City Council is currently considering an ordinance that will overhaul Newark’s zoning regulations. While the ordinance has received a fair amount of pushback, both the process and the urban planning behind the ordinance are fundamentally sound. 

Planning is supposed to be built upon a long-term vision rather than chasing the newest shiny object. To ensure that, the Municipal Land Use Law requires zoning to be consistent with the Master Plan (or special reasons provided for deviations). If you read through the Master Plan, particularly the Land Use Element, and compare it to the proposed changes in the 2023 Zoning Ordinance, there is substantial consistency. Changes proposed in both the Master Plan and the 2023 Zoning Ordinance include increasing height and density along commercial corridors, increasing density within residential neighborhoods, and permitting accessory dwelling units. 

The vision was developed through the Master Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance is implementing that vision. Both the zoning ordinance and the Newark360 Master Plan were the subject of multiple meetings throughout the five wards of the city. My family was able to attend meetings for both: my daughter and I even made it into one of the photos in the Master Plan. This engagement helped the Master Plan take into consideration the voices of the residents of the city, and the engagement for the Zoning Ordinance allowed people to understand the proposed change before the ordinance was sent to the Council. While not everyone is happy about the ordinance, they did have a chance to have their voice heard in both the Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance process.

In terms of the contents of the ordinance, the proposed Zoning Ordinance increases density throughout the city, and that’s a good thing. 

Since 2010, there have been relatively large increases in populations in urban areas within the tri-state area, and as prices go up in New York City, Hoboken, and Jersey City, people look further out and are now coming in large numbers to Newark. Such a change certainly causes tensions and concerns about gentrification. Nonetheless, restricting construction does not actually fix the issue. Trying to limit development in a city of 300,000 does not stop the relocation patterns of a metro area population of 20 million. Rather, preventing development simply ensures that the people who do come will be competing for the same housing as those who are already here. The best way to protect current residents from gentrification is to ensure there is sufficient housing for future residents.

It has been argued that increasing the permitted number of units gives more power to landlords. This simply is not the case. Landlords have more power when there are more renters chasing housing than there is housing available. Landlords also have more power when there are fewer of them, making collusion easier. The best way to break the power of the landlords is to ensure there is a high supply of housing and that there is an ever-increasing number of individual landlords. The proposed ordinance helps on both fronts.

The Zoning Ordinance increases density in R-1 to R-3 Districts (areas permitting between one and three-family buildings), which may be one of the best strategies in the zoning ordinance. Increasing the number of units permitted on a lot by one dwelling incentivizes existing buildings to either be expanded or to be redivided into additional units rather than large-scale demolition and redevelopment. This is the sort of change that can be handled by a typical homeowner and is the type of change that does not require a massive capital investment, which in turn leads to a need for higher rents. This is the sort of policy most likely to benefit new and small-scale landlords, thus dividing the power of the landlord class among more people.

The Zoning Ordinance also increases the density permitted in commercial and mixed-use districts. These districts are typically located along major commercial corridors—think Bloomfield, South Orange, Springfield—which are the areas best served by transit and are the types of areas where we should be promoting high-density development. Creating areas for large amounts of housing once again helps decrease the power of landlords since there will be fewer renters chasing each apartment. Furthermore, by creating the opportunity for development on corridors, it takes development pressure away from lower-density residential areas like the R-1 to R-3 districts discussed above. 

Newark does not get to choose the situation it finds itself in; it does get to choose how to react to that situation, however. New residents are coming and will find housing one way or another. The city can restrict the construction of housing, and the future residents of Newark will outbid current residents in neighborhoods across the city. With limited housing, landlords will have additional leverage and power over their tenants. Newark can, on the other hand, allow for more residential construction so that when the future residents of Newark arrive, there are new apartments for them to occupy rather than bidding out existing residents. With more dwellings available for current and future residents, landlords will have less power when negotiating leases. Regardless of how the city reacts to the situation, the character of Newark will change. The question is what type of change is better for the city and its residents. A future with abundant housing is better than one with restricted housing availability, and on that basis, I hope the City of Newark adopts the proposed ordinance. 

Chris Kok is a professional planner and is currently serving as the Township Planner for Wayne, NJ. He moved to Newark in 2013 and has been on a northward trajectory; starting in the Ironbound, and moving to James Street, before buying a home with his wife in Upper Roseville. During his free time you can find him walking his dog in Branch Brook Park or hiding behind his camera.

^{Feature image by Pexels}