Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Racial disparity in the atlanta housing market

  • Articles
  • III. Case Studies
  • Published:
The Review of Black Political Economy

Abstract

Atlanta has the reputation of being a city of opportunity for blacks. However, in Atlanta, as well as in other cities across the nation, the nexus of racism and economic discrimination has resulted in disparities between the housing status of blacks and whites. This article examines racial disparities in the Atlanta housing market. It begins by tracing recent trends in the Atlanta-area economy and by providing background information on the local housing market. It then discusses the roles of the federal Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 and Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 in the efforts of local groups to reduce racial disparities in the housing market. The final section discusses recent local developments that might lead to improvements in the housing status of black Atlantans.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. John Helyar, “ The Big Hustle: Atlanta’s Two Worlds: Wealth and Poverty, Magnet and Mirage,”The Wall Street Journal, (February 29, 1989), p. 1

  2. The Atlanta Metropolitan Statistical Area, shown in Map 1, consists of eighteen counties. This study is based on the smaller seven-county region served by the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC), one of eighteen regional planning agencies established by the Georgia legislature. The counties served by ARC are Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Douglas, Fulton, Gwinnett, and Rockdale. These counties are shaded in Map 1. An eighth county, Henry, was added to the Atlanta region in 1989. This study focuses on the seven counties in the region prior to that time, since ARC has not yet compiled a complete set of time-series data for Henry County.

  3. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,County and City Data Book,1984 (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce).

  4. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,State and Metropolitan Area Data Book, 1986 (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce).

  5. Thierry Noyelle, “ The Rise of Advanced Services: Some Implications for Economic Development in U.S. Cities,”Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 49, No. 3 (Spring 1983), pp. 283–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Atlanta Regional Commission,Atlanta Region Outlook (Atlanta, GA: Atlanta Regional Commission, May 1990), pp. A-16–A-22.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Frank Hughes,Economic and Spatial Transformations in Atlanta: A Political Economy Approach (Master’s thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1989).

  8. ARC groups blacks and others in the data it provides on the racial and ethnic characteristics of the population. Data from the 1980 Census of Population indicate that most of the people in this group are black. Of the 509,555 people classified as “black and other” in 1980, 92 percent were black, 4 percent were of Spanish origin, and 2 percent were Asian or Pacific Islanders. In recent years, the Spanish origin and Asian populations have grown rapidly. However, blacks remain the predominant group within the black and other category.

  9. Larry Keating and Max Creighton,Nonprofit Housing Supply: Atlanta Case (Atlanta, GA: Community Design Center, 1989), p. 19.

    Google Scholar 

  10. David M. Smith,Geography, Inequality, and Society (Cambridge, England: University of Cambridge Press, 1987), pp. 56–57.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ibid., p. 58. Smith used coefficients of variation to measure the degree of income inequality within groups of black and white census tracts. The coefficient of variation provides a measure of dispersion and is calculated by dividing the standard deviation of a distribution by the distribution’s mean. The coefficient of variation for median family income in black tracts in Atlanta increased from 23.83 in 1960 to 29.24 in 1970, and then to 49.08 in 1980. The coefficient for median family income in white tracts increased from 47.93 in 1960 to 48.21 in 1970, but then decreased to 38.49 in 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  12. David L. Sjoquist,The Economic Status of Black Atlantans (Atlanta, GA: The Atlanta Urban League, Inc., 1988), Table 3.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Keating and Creighton,Nonprofit Housing Supply, pp. 34-36.

  14. City of Atlanta, Department of Community Development, Bureau of Planning,Mayor’s Proposed Housing Plan (July 1989), p. 20. Single-family includes single-unit detached, single-unit attached, and duplex structures.

  15. Ibid., p. 59.

  16. Ibid., p. 72.

  17. Keating and Creighton, p. 37.

  18. Atlanta Regional Commission,1989 Population and Housing (Atlanta, GA: Atlanta Regional Commission, 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Keating and Creighton, pp. 24-33.

  20. City of Atlanta, pp. 34-38, 113.

  21. City of Atlanta, Department of Community Development, Bureau of Planning,Urban Enterprise Zone Program (June 1989).

  22. See Keating and Creighton for discussions of efforts to promote the development of high-income housing near the CBD and the history of urban renewal in the Bedford Pine community.

  23. Maria Saporta, “Intown Housing No Longer on the Outside,”The Atlanta Journal and Constitution (May 20, 1990), p. H-l.

  24. Keating and Creighton, p. 90.

  25. Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975), p. 501.

  26. Anne B. Shlay, “Financing Community: Methods of Assessing Residential Credit Disparities, Market Barriers, and Institutional Reinvestment Performance in the Metropolis,”Journal of Urban Affairs, Vol. 11, No. 3 (1989), pp. 204–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Federal Register, Vol. 43, No. 198 (October 12, 1978), pp. 47144-47155.

  28. Francis X. Grady, “Setting Out a Workable Program for Generating Community Reinvestment,”Office of Thrift Supervision Journal (March 1990), pp. 16-19.

  29. Shlay, p. 203.

  30. Grady, p. 17.

  31. Shlay, p. 203.

  32. Much of the information in this section was obtained from an April 24, 1990 interview with Dennis Goldstein, a housing attorney with the Atlanta Legal Aid Society, Inc., which represented members of ACRA.

  33. Bill Dedman,The Color of Money, series reprint,The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, (May 1-4, 1988), p. 26.

  34. Ibid. The analysis relied on a methodology developed by researchers at the Hubert A. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota, Johns Hopkins University, and Temple University. Research assistance was provided by Stan Fitterman, a graduate student in city planning at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Fitterman had conducted some of the preliminary analysis used earlier by ACRA.

  35. Dedman, pp. 1-2.

  36. Ibid., p. 43.

  37. Michelle Murff, “ The Atlanta Mortgage Consortium, Inc.,” unpublished paper, City Planning Program, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1989.

  38. “New Directions in Atlanta Housing Policies,” presentation by John Reid, Executive Officer, Office of the Mayor, City of Atlanta. Delivered at the Spring Conference of the Georgia Planning Association, May 18, 1990, Atlanta.

  39. Amy Wallace, “Housing Plan Met with Skepticism,”The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, August 28, 1989, p. A-l.

  40. “Nonprofits and Low-Income Housing, ”Research Horizons, Vol 18, No. 1 (Spring 1990), pp. 28-29.

  41. Robert Luke, /’’Community Groups Challenge Proposed C and S Sovran Merger, ”The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, (January 24, 1990), p. B-l.

  42. Federal Register, Vol. 55, No. 84, (May 1, 1990), pp. 18163-13175 and Grady, p. 17. As of July 1, 1990, regulatory agencies will be required to make public their ratings of the CRA performance of financial institutions. They will also be required to replace the five-tiered numerical rating system with a four-tiered descriptive rating system. The four ratings to be used in assessing the extent to which financial institutions meet community credit needs are “outstanding,” “satisfactory,” “needs to improve,” and “substantial noncompliance.” The performance areas to be assessed are the determination of community credit needs, the marketing and types of credit offered and extended, the geo-graphic distribution and record of opening and closing offices, discrimination and other illegal practices, and community development. Congressional support for community reinvestment issues has been provided by Representative Henry Gonzalez, chairman of the Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives.

  43. Mark Sherman, “City and C & S Set to Launch Program to Create More Low-Cost Housing,”The Atlanta Journal and Constitution, (May 6, 1990), p. D-3.

  44. “Nonprofits and Low-Income Housing,” p. 28.

Download references

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Robinson, C.J. Racial disparity in the atlanta housing market. Rev Black Polit Econ 19, 85–109 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02895339

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02895339

Keywords

Navigation