Split Apart: How Regulations Designated Populations to Different Parts of the City

Chapter

Abstract

This chapter reviews how urban regulations in history have been used to relegate populations to different parts of the city and its environs. Its main purpose is to place the twentieth-century U.S. zoning experience in historic and international context. To this end, based mostly on secondary sources, the chapter first surveys a selection of major civilizations in history and the regulations they invented in order to keep populations apart. Then, based on primary sources, it discusses the emergence of three methods of residential segregation through zoning which took root in early twentieth-century United States. The three methods are: segregating people by race, segregating them by different land-area standards, and segregating them based on both land-area standards and a taxonomy of single- versus multi-family housing.

References

  1. Abrams, R., & Washington, V. (1989). The misunderstood law of public nuisance: A comparison with private nuisance twenty years after Boomer. Albany Law Review, 54, 359.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, T. (1935). Outline of town and city planning. New York: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  3. Akimoto, F. (2009). The birth of ‘land use planning’ in American urban planning. Planning Perspectives, 24(4), 457–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnott, R. J., & McMillen, D. P. (Eds.). (2008). A companion to urban economics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  5. Bassett, E. (1922a). Zoning. New York: National Municipal League.Google Scholar
  6. Bassett, E. (1922b). Home owners make better citizens. Baltimore: Baltimore Municipal Journal.Google Scholar
  7. Baumeister, R. (1876). Stadt-Erweiterungen in technischer, baupolizeilicher und wirthschaftlicher Beziehung. Ernst & Korn.Google Scholar
  8. Benevolo, L. (1980). The history of the city. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Ben-Joseph, E., & Kiefer, M. J. (2005). The code of the city: Standards and the hidden language of place making. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bither, B. (1915). A factory zone necessary for industrial development in Berkeley. Berkeley Civic Bulletin, 3(10), 167–177.Google Scholar
  11. Boger, G. (2009). The meaning of neighborhood in the modern city: Baltimore’s residential segregation ordinances, 1910–1913. Journal of Urban History, 35(2), 236–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bruegmann, R. (2006). Sprawl: A compact history. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Cherry, G. E. (1996). Town planning in Britain since 1900: The rise and fall of the planning ideal. Oxford and Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  15. Constable, O. R. (2004). Housing the stranger in the Mediterranean world: Lodging, trade, and travel in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Dursteler, E. (2006). Venetians in Constantinople: Nation, identity, and coexistence in the Early modern Mediterranean. Baltimore: JHU Press.Google Scholar
  17. Dutt, B. B. (1925). Town planning in ancient India. Daryaganj: Gyan Publishing House.Google Scholar
  18. Fairman, H. (1949) cited in Morris, A. E. J. (1979). History of Urban Form. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  19. Fifoot, C. H. S. (1949). History and sources of the common law: Tort and contract. Greenwood Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  20. Fischel, W. A. (2000). Zoning and land use regulation. Encyclopedia of Law and Economics, 2, 403–423.Google Scholar
  21. Fishman, R. (1987). Bourgeois Utopias: The rise and fall of suburbia. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  22. Fry, R., & Taylor, P. (2012). The rise of residential segregation by income. Pew Research Center. Retrieved February 15, 2013, from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/08/01/the-rise-of-residential-segregation-by-income/
  23. Gates, C. (2010). City: Historical overview and theoretical issues. In M. Gagarin (Ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece and Rome (Vol. 2, pp. 151–161). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Green, N. (2011). A Chronicle of Urban Codes in Pre-Industrial London’s Streets and Squares. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  25. Gries, J. M., & Ford, J. (1932). Planning for residential districts. In President’s Conference on home building and home ownership (1931: Washington, DC). The President’s conference on home building and home ownership.Google Scholar
  26. Grinnalds, J. (1921). The Housing Survey is Necessary before Zoning. Baltimore Municipal Journal, 2.Google Scholar
  27. Hall, E. (2006). Divide and sprawl, decline and fall: A comparative critique of Euclidean zoning. University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 68, 915.Google Scholar
  28. Hall, T. (2003). Planning Europe’s capital cities: Aspects of nineteenth-century urban development. Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Hannaford, I. (1996). Race: The history of an idea in the West. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.Google Scholar
  30. Heitzman, J. (2008). The city in South Asia. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Hirt, S. (2007). The devil is in the definitions: Contrasting American and German approaches to Zoning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 73(4), 436–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hirt, S. (2012). Mixed use by default: How the Europeans (don’t) zone. CPL Bibliography, 27(4), 375–393.Google Scholar
  33. Hirt, S. (2013a). Form follows function? How America zones. Planning Practice & Research, 28(2), 204–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hirt, S. (2013b). Home, sweet home: American residential zoning in comparative perspective. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 33(3), 292–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Horsfall, T. (1904). The improvement of the dwellings and surroundings of the people: The example of Germany: Supplement to the Report of the Manchester and Salford Citizens’ association for the improvement of the unwholesome dwellings and surroundings of the people. Manchester: University of Manchester Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hugo-Brunt, M. (1972). The history of city planning: A survey. Eugene: Harvest House.Google Scholar
  37. Karst, K. L. Buchanan v. Warley 245 US 60 (1917). Encyclopedia of the American Constitution, 1.Google Scholar
  38. Kayden, J. (2004). Reconsidering zoning: Expanding an American land-use frontier. Zoning Practice, 1, 2–13.Google Scholar
  39. Keene, D., Nagy, B., & Szende, K. (Eds.). (2009). Segregation, integration, assimilation: Religious and ethnic groups in the medieval towns of Central and Eastern Europe. Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  40. Knox, P. L., & McCarthy, L. (2005). Urbanization: An introduction to urban geography. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  41. Knox, P. L., & McCarthy, L. (2012). Urbanization: An introduction to urban geography. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
  42. Kostylo, J. (2012). Sinking and shrinking city: Cosmopolitanism, historical memory and social change in Venice. Post-cosmopolitan Cities: Explorations of Urban Coexistence, 9, 170.Google Scholar
  43. LeGates, R. (2004). Early urban planning (Vol. 9). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Levine, J. (2010). Zoned out: Regulation, markets, and choices in transportation and metropolitan land use. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  45. Levy, J. M. (2009). Contemporary urban planning (pp. 72–73). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  46. Liebmann, G. W. (2002). Modernization of zoning: A means to reform. Appraisal Journal, 70(2), 224–229.Google Scholar
  47. Light, M. A. (1999). Different ideas of the city: Origins of Metropolitan land-use regimes in the United States, Germany, and Switzerland. Yale Journal of International Law, 24, 577.Google Scholar
  48. Lofland, L. H. (1985). A world of strangers: Order and action in urban public space. Long Grove: Waveland Press.Google Scholar
  49. Logan, T. H. (1976). The Americanization of German zoning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 42(4), 377–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Low, S. (2004). Behind the gates: Life, security, and the pursuit of happiness in Fortress America. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Manning, T., & Ritzdorf, M. (1997). Urban planning and the African American community: In the shadows. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  52. Marcuse, P., & Van Kempen, R. (2002). Of states and cities: The partitioning of urban space. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. McDuffee, D. (1916). A practical application of the zone ordinance. Berkeley Civic Bulletin, 1.Google Scholar
  54. McKenzie, E. (1994). Privatopia: Homeowner associations and the rise of residential private government. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Morgenthau, H. (1909). A national constructive programme for city planning. In Proceedings of the First National Conference on City Planning and the Problems Of Congestion, Washington DC. 1909 (pp. 59–60).Google Scholar
  56. Mullin, J. (1976). American perceptions of German city planning at the turn of the century. Urbanism Past and Present, 1(3), 5–15.Google Scholar
  57. New York Heights of Buildings Commission. (1913). Report of the Heights of Buildings Commission to the Committee on the Height, Size and Arrangement of Buildings of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment of the City of New York.Google Scholar
  58. Nightingale, C. H. (2012). Segregation: A global history of divided cities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  59. Pendall, R., Puentes, R., & Martin, J. (2006). From traditional to reformed: A review of the land use regulations in the nation’s 50 largest metropolitan areas. Brookings Institution, Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.Google Scholar
  60. Platt, R. H. (2004). Land use and society. Revised Edition: Geography, Law, and Public Policy. Island Press.Google Scholar
  61. Power, G. (1989). The advent of zoning. Planning Perspective, 4(1), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rasmussen, S. E. (1937). London: The unique city (p. 166). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  63. Reynolds, D. W. (1997). The lost architecture of ancient Rome: Insights from the severan plan and the regionary catalogues. Expedition, 39, 15–24.Google Scholar
  64. Scott, M. (1978). American city planning since 1890. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  65. Sjoberg, G. (1960). The preindustrial city: Past and present. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
  66. Smith, M. E. (2010). The archaeological study of neighborhoods and districts in ancient cities. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 29(2), 137–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Talen, E. (2012). City rules: How regulations affect urban form. Island Press.Google Scholar
  68. The New York Times. (1910). Baltimore tries drastic plan of race segregation, December 25, 5.Google Scholar
  69. Toll, S. I. (1969). Zoned American. Grossman Publishers.Google Scholar
  70. Tretter, E. M., Sounny, M. A., & Student, S. P. (2012). Austin restricted: Progressivism, zoning, private racial covenants, and the making of a segregated city. Geography, 512, 471–516.Google Scholar
  71. Van Ham, M., Manley, D., Bailey, N., Simpson, L., & Maclennan, D. (2012). Neighbourhood effects research: new perspectives. In M. van Ham, D. Manley, N. Bailey, L. Simpson, & D. Maclennan (Eds.), Neighbourhood effects research: New perspectives (pp. 1–21). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  72. Van Kempen, R., & Şule Özüekren, A. (1998). Ethnic segregation in cities: New forms and explanations in a dynamic world. Urban Studies, 35(10), 1631–1656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Vance, J. E. (1990). The continuing city: Urban morphology in western civilization. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Whittemore, A. H. (2013). How the federal government zoned America: The federal housing administration and zoning. Journal of Urban History, 39(4), 620–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wickersham, J. (2000). Jane Jacobs’ critique of zoning: From Euclid to Portland and beyond. BC Environmental Affairs Law Review, 28, 547.Google Scholar
  76. Williams, F. B. (1913). The German zone building regulations. Report of the Heights of Buildings Commission to the Committee on the Height, Size and Arrangement of Buildings of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment of the City of New York, 94–119.Google Scholar
  77. Williams, F. B. (1914). Building regulation by districts, the lesson of Berlin (No. 24). National Housing Association.Google Scholar
  78. Williams, F. B. (1922). The law of city planning and zoning. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/lawcityplanning00willgoog

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Architecture, Planning and PreservationUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations