Places to Grow

Even in the midst of recession, Long Islanders continue to confront the question of what type of place the Island will become over the next generation. As a mature suburban region whose era of rapid population growth is well behind it, there is a persistent question of how much and what type of new development is both desirable and achievable. While the subject stirs intense debate, polls and planning processes indicate that there is consensus around a number of key themes. Residents want to maintain the essential suburban character of Long Island. They want to keep housing costs and taxes affordable. They want both younger families and a growing older population to be able to stay here. They want to protect as much of the Island’s remaining open space as possible.

Increasingly, Long Islanders have been embracing the idea that these goals can best be met by focusing new housing, stores and offices in our existing downtowns, commercial strips or industrial areas rather than in largely residential neighborhoods or in undeveloped farmland or open space. However, this general consensus often breaks down over questions of which places are most appropriate for new development and how much these communities can absorb. When Long Islanders look around their existing downtowns, many wonder if there is really enough space to meet these needs and how growth would affect their own neighborhood and experience.

This analysis delves into the question of whether or not Long Island has sufficient redevelopment capacity in our downtowns. Using a combination of land use, demographic and infrastructure data, redevelopment potential was evaluated for areas within a half mile of downtown centers and Long Island Rail Road stations. A key finding was the identification of over 8,300 acres of vacant land and parking lots that could be used for new housing, commercial development and public spaces and facilities. This is equivalent to approximately 13 square miles or 1.1% of Long Island’s land mass. In sports terms, it is equal to 7,580 football fields. In comparison to New York City, it is roughly equivalent to Manhattan below 50th Street. When seen from these comparative perspectives, 8,300 acres represents a lot of possibilities.

Assuming a combination of different multi-family building types, the report sees the possibility to create tens of thousands of new housing units and jobs across the region, all located in our downtowns. In fact, the need to build up our downtowns has reached the tipping point for Long Island. If we were to allow every single acre of unprotected open space to be developed for low-density single-family homes, we could build another 90,000 new homes.

By contrast, that same number, 90,000 units, could be achieved by building a mixture of townhouses, garden apartments and apartment buildings on about half of the 8,300 acres of unbuilt land in downtown areas.

There are limitations to this type of analysis; while potential available land can be seen, local conditions, needs and markets can only be determined through extensive site-by-site analysis. Therefore, as local factors are analyzed in greater detail, some of the report’s assumptions will need to be updated and modified. Local factors could limit the feasibility of developing in a place that is identified as having High Potential, or alternatively, there could be more opportunities than were revealed and a downtown’s potential may be greater than indicated in this report.

The goal of this report is to further the conversation about how Long Island can grow by focusing on the underdeveloped asset of our downtowns. There are many reasons to focus on the downtowns, from the environmental to the economic to the social. For example, a comparison of two regions that pursued opposing development patterns—one focused on transit-oriented development and open space preservation (Portland, Oregon), the other focused largely on developing land and building roadways (Atlanta, Georgia)—saw very different outcomes. In a study by Arthur C. Nelson, ​“Effects of Urban Containment on Housing Prices and Landowner Behavior”1, he demonstrated greater job growth, lower property taxes, fewer cars, better environmental outcomes in Portland, which pursued the more contained development strategy. Above are a few of the comparisons.

Other studies have corroborated this point and shown that compact, mixed-use development is generally tax-positive, bringing in more tax revenues than the cost of new services. Both national and local studies have shown that typical multi-family and mixed-use developments produce more tax revenue and fewer school-age children than single-family housing developments.

Long Island has some serious choices to make in its immediate future. How do we want to plan for the future? Can we reinvigorate our economy? Will we create an environment that welcomes newcomers from different backgrounds as well as new employers? Will we find a way to keep young adults here and offer housing alternatives for young and old? Hard questions but they are being faced by cities, towns and villages across the country. There is a race and some communities will succeed and some will fail. Long Island has the ​“bones” in its downtowns to be one of the success stories. In fact, newer communities often create downtowns from scratch and design a character to go along with it that is based on an invented idea of place or history. Many have succeeded in creating a lot with very little. Yet, Long Island’s downtowns were once the envy of other regions of the country. We have the character, the historical significance, the natural beauty of our surroundings and a strong sense of place. Today the question for us to ask is how can we continue to do so little with so much? The race is on and Long Island has yet to write its future.