Zoning: What's the point?

The list of practical and moral objections to zoning is endless, yet its proponents have managed to make it happen...Why?  Houston is one of the most vibrant and desirable of the large cities in the U.S.  It has a lower cost of living, fewer ethnic problems, greater opportunities and less government... and so far, no zoning.

Would Greenway Plaza [A very successful commercial development that bought out an aging and decaying post World War II residential subdivision located on a major freeway to build a sports arena and business park.  100% of the owners agreed without any coercion other than a lot of money.] exist if there had been zoning...No.  Do the people who sold their homes for 10 times their residential value regret their decision?... no.  In fact, every subdivision in the Greenway Plaza area was standing in line to be next.  In a zoned Houston, such change might have happened gradually, but only with an enormously inflated cost, lots of jobs for Architects and Lawyers, and a lot less pay back to the constituents.

Without zoning, Houston has been able to respond like no other major city to the economic needs of its citizens.  Houston has make dramatic land use changes possible when they are economically [and socially] appropriate.  The city has been responsive to and responsible for its needs without the cumbersome inefficiency and indecision of bureaucratic review.
A city is the product of its inhabitants' best and worst influences much like a child is created and influenced by his or her parents.  Like all parents, we must eventually realize that our creation must exist without our guidance.  No matter how much we sentimentalize the issues, a city, like a child, is a product of its time and place.  To survive, a city must be dynamic and have the opportunity to change or even exceed its heritage.

What right do we have to superimpose our present standards on the future?  How can we be so arrogant and so sure that the future won't be as good or better than the present?  The greatest legacy we can leave our children and our cities is an environment that offers them the possibility and the opportunity to grow and expand.

Life is a dynamic process, not a static event.  Likewise, a city has a momentum of its own, drawing on its diverse aggregate of inhabitants each with his or her own priorities, time tables and accountabilities.  We must remember that it is impossible to predict with an certainty the direction or scope of a city's growth from one day to the next.

Zoning is expensive, ineffective, and repressive.  It is a capricious game played by power brokers of all persuasions, most of whom are distant and inaccessible to all but the insiders and their cronies.  Their is little or no voter control over the decisions made by the politically appointed, even though their decisions are supposedly, executed in the name of the voter's welfare.

Zoning frequently amounts to little more than an elaborate method of archiving every minute land use decision so that the focus of the planning commission becomes more involved in fixing present mistakes rather than preventing future mistakes.  Zoning gives us a patchwork quilt of out-of-context decisions [variances] based on one particular viewpoint rather than the dynamics of a city's growth.  Rather than providing a platform for rational growth, zoning provides a stumbling block.

The irony is that much of the order that zoning purports to protect couldn't happen under the rules and restrictions of zoning.  Many cities' most treasured landmarks simply wouldn't exist, and any equivalent in the future will face an immensely expensive and very painful birth.  Sixth Street in Austin, Deep Ellum in Dallas, the warehouse district in San Francisco, SOHO and Greenwich Village in New York all prized for their diversity could not have been legislated into existence.  Now, however, they are protected by zoning as static environments like exhibits in a museum.  Zoning prohibits the very elements that fostered the development of such landmark areas in the first place... individuality, creativity, and change.

Houston became one of the most desirable cities in which to live and work without zoning, but all of a sudden, based on vague and unprovable contentions that have actually failed in other cities, we seem to be on the verge of abandoning the most successful formula in the country.

Houston already has in place a reasonable and highly effective mechanism for protecting residential [and commercial] neighborhoods--deed restrictions.  These are initiated by the affected people, not by politicians.  Deed restrictions can do far more to maintain the character of a neighborhood than zoning ever could: they are immediate, voluntary, democratic, nonpolitical, and cheap.  In addition, enforcement of deed restrictions can be facilitated by the city's participation without the bureaucratic nightmare of the planning commission.  Why would anyone settle for less?

While the rest of the world unravels the layers of repressive big brother government, we who should know better add them back.  Ironically, the opportunities for growth and improvement in the quality of life are more accessible to more levels of the population than they have ever been.  Zoning is government by conformity and fear, not possibility and enrichment.

Even though I am an Architect, Planner, and builder, I want no part of curating the land use patterns and, consequently, the economic affairs of a whole city.  I truly love and respect the diversity of culture, motive and ability that is possible in the growth of a healthy city.  If I ever wanted protection from an activity that I found repugnant, I would live in an area with deed restrictions and/or fences and guard dogs that provided me with the necessary protection.... but I would never consider imprisoning anyone else with my values.  It hurts me deeply to see Houston even consider zoning as an apparent solution to anything.

pwd