New Issue Brief: Fixing NYC’s Broken Land Use Process

Charter reform could unlock housing growth and curb parochial veto power

NEW YORK, NY  — This spring Mayor Eric Adams tasked the 2025 Charter Revision Commission (CRC) with combatting the city’s generational housing crisis. CRC can propose changes to any provision of the city charter, making this a rare opportunity to fix one of the biggest obstacles to progress: a land-use process that is slow, costly, and easily derailed by local opposition. In a new Manhattan Institute report, senior fellow and former city planner Eric Kober analyzes proposals CRC might consider to reform the city’s byzantine land-use procedures and restore citywide priorities to the forefront of decision-making.

The land-use power not only determines the extent and pace of physical change but also political power and patronage. Kober warns that today’s process has swung too far toward parochialism. He argues that while democratization is necessary, the 1989 Charter’s shift of land-use authority to the city council—along with the rise of “member deference”—has empowered local vetoes that block new housing and thwart growth.

To address these issues and enable a more functional, accountable land-use system, the report  discusses several recommendations offered in his own testimony to the CRC, as well as civic groups’, including:

• Shorten ULURP timelines: Combine community board and borough president review into a single 60-day window to reduce delays and lower costs for applicants.
• Streamline reviews: Remove minor land actions like street grade changes or city land dispositions without zoning changes from ULURP entirely.
• Empower a zoning administrator: Create a new position within the Department of City Planning to approve minor zoning waivers, including small multifamily buildings on residential lots.
• Rebalance council power: Curb the council’s ability to block housing by allowing certain actions to proceed without a vote—or be overridden by the City Planning Commission under strict criteria.

These proposals, Kober argues, would preserve public input while restoring the city’s ability to plan and build for the future. By changing the balance of power among the mayor, city council, borough presidents, public advocate, and community boards, CRC can substantially improve the city’s future housing trajectory.

Click here to read the full report.