Zurich approves stricter regulations for skyscrapers

Context

In brief

• Zurich restricts areas for skyscrapers
• 62.6% approve the stricter variant
• 62.6% reject the Municipal Council's counter-proposal
• Voter turnout: 45.8%

Key Facts

• What → partial revision of the BZO zoning plan
• Where → city of Zurich
• Tall buildings → approximately 300 over 25 meters
• Buildings up to 80 meters → railway tracks and Oerlikon center
• Vote → 62.6% for the City Council's variant
• Turnout → 45.8%

Zurich has approved the partial revision of the zoning plan, the Bau- und Zonenordnung (BZO), in a vote, introducing a stricter framework for skyscrapers and reducing the areas in which they can be built. The news was reported by Keystone-ATS.

Currently, the city has approximately 300 buildings taller than 25 meters. This figure provides the background for a revision that the Municipal Council had presented with a less restrictive approach than the one later approved by the City Council.

The initial project planned to keep the total area designated for residential towers virtually unchanged. The executive branch wanted to reduce the zones for buildings up to 80 meters, introduce new areas for those up to 60 meters, and expand the areas for constructions between 25 and 40 meters.

The variant chosen at the polls

The City Council profoundly modified the project. In the approved variant, buildings up to 80 meters will be permitted only along railway tracks and in the center of Oerlikon. Furthermore, several zones planned for constructions up to 40 meters were eliminated.

For the left and the SVP, this solution makes it possible to avoid a wave of demolitions and to better protect the population from the risk of displacement from their neighborhoods. The stated objective for both variants remained the integration of tall buildings into the urban fabric. The plan indicated directions such as more lively ground floors, more space for public and community use, and an enhancement of green areas.

The outcome of the vote gave 62.6% to the more restrictive variant of the City Council. The Municipal Council's counter-proposal was rejected by the same percentage. Turnout was 45.8%. The vote therefore chose the project modified by the City Council, not the initial proposal from the Municipal Council.

Operational details

The practical significance for the city

The practical significance of the vote lies in the selection of locations, not in a new abstract height category. A comparison of the two projects shows that the municipal government had envisaged a redistribution of the areas: less space for buildings up to 80 metres, new areas for buildings up to 60 metres and an expansion for constructions between 25 and 40 metres. The City Council pushed the restriction further, limiting buildings up to 80 metres to the railway tracks and the centre of Oerlikon and eliminating several zones for those up to 40 metres.

For Swiss readers, the case brings together four housing issues in a single vote: where to build, how high, how to integrate ground floors and how to enhance green spaces and community uses.

Before and after, without confusing the variants

For those living in the city, this distinction offers a practical key to understanding the issue. The question is not only how tall a building can be, but in which area it can be placed. For the up-to-80-metre range, the answer contained in the approved variant is limited to two territorial references: the railway tracks and the centre of Oerlikon. For the range between 25 and 40 metres, by contrast, the source notes the elimination of several zones that the initial project would have expanded.

The vote therefore links vertical development to the shape of everyday spaces. Both variants aimed for livelier ground floors, more space for public and community uses and the enhancement of green areas. These are the elements to observe when assessing the result from an urban perspective: not only the presence of a tall building, but the relationship between construction, the street level, collective uses and greenery.

The reference to the railway tracks makes it natural to pair the urban-planning perspective with that of the mezzi pubblici. For Swiss readers, the case shows how density, neighbourhoods, collective spaces and greenery are connected in the debate. The arguments of the left and the SVP remain central: avoiding a wave of demolitions and providing greater protection for the population against the risk of being displaced from their neighbourhoods.

Recommended tools

For an updated estimate, use the net salary calculator and the CHF-EUR exchange comparator.

Key points

translated text

Discover Ticino job offers updated daily: 4,000+ positions from Swiss companies hiring cross-border workers.

Source: swissinfo.ch