Exclusionary Zoning Laws In New York City

This review focuses on the Hornbook’s chapter 10, which is about the constitutional limitations in land use controls. Specifically, this covers the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment which states that “nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation ,“ the Fourteenth Amendment which extends the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment to the states and prohibits the state from violating the individual 's rights of due process and equal protection, the First Amendment’s freedom of expression and religion, and the related land use planning cases.

Segregation in cities has been an issue ever since the beginning of time. People have always liked to put themselves in boxes, and divide people up by seemingly arbitrary concepts. Some of these divisions happen due to more physical traits, with the most prominent example being segregation based on racial differences, with certain ethnicities being concentrated in certain areas of the city. In a more modern setting, this can be seen in inner cities areas considered to be ‘black neighborhoods’, due to the large african american population.

During the early 1900’s, Louisville attempted to segregate by creating regulations that kept Caucasian people from moving into a neighborhood where most of the minority races were already living and visa versa. They did not want for the races to mix so they created these laws which were ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court trial “Buchanan v. Warley”(Broken Sidewalk). This also occurred in other cities but none were as prominent as the commotion created by Louisville. Because of the ruling of the Supreme Court, zonings were created where race was not able to be a reason for granting or denying the right to a house. There were still some places that were denying the sale of houses to blacks because they were in a “restricted housing covenant”. These were ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1948, however, they still affected the lives and home sales of these houses that were considered “restricted”. Despite all these efforts, the neighborhoods were still heavily segregated socially and economically. People would only live with others of their same socioeconomic class which president Nixon saw as a big problem. He decided to take action in 1968 when he appointed George Romney the head of Housing and Urban development. George Romney was the governor for Michigan, and he strongly endorsed open housing and the integration of neighborhoods. Romney helped change the demographic of housing across the entire United

Mandatory inclusionary zoning violates the 5th and 14th Amendments. Lack of affordable housing across the country is an issue that has gained national attention, and some areas in the country have resorted to zoning strategies to address the problem. For example, builders in Seattle who take advantage of the Incentive Zoning program will receive additional floor area in exchange for including affordable housing units in their developments (Director’s Rule, 2015). In contrast, mandatory inclusionary zoning is the unconstitutional practice of requiring private developers to include a specified percentage of affordable housing in their projects (Lerman, 2006). Mandatory inclusionary zoning violates the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment. It also violates the life, liberty and property interest protections of Due Process as well as the equal protection provisions under the 14th Amendment.

Inclusionary zoning is a tool to help accomplish affordable housing. The main goal of it is to build a certain percentages of house but to where the houses can be afforded by middle/low income earners. Incentives are provided to act as cost offsets and include density bonuses, tax abatement, and reduced parking charges. Density bonuses motivate developers to have additional units which result in an increased profit margin. On subscription to the inclusionary zoning, benefits accrued eventually lower costs that would have otherwise been charged on the developers. This technique provides a sustainable method of dealing with housing shortage (Dietderich 13). The municipality, however, cannot force developers to set a particular minimum price and therefore the government can only provide incentives to developers to voluntarily provide the units for low-income earners.

According to Jack Poe, master of science real estate appraisal and state certified real state appraiser in Texas, “According to Babcock’s classic study, the primary effect of Houston’s lack of zoning has been…high income neighborhoods have been preserved by the employment of private covenants and low income neighborhoods have sought in-home commercial development (like a small repair shop) as a way to add value to otherwise low value homes. (Babcock 1966, P. 28).” What all this means to the modern developer in Houston is that they have more freedom to develop what they perceive is needed. The remedy to Houston’s continuing discourse over zoning is a democratic zoning process that is not completely laissez-fair in its approach, as currently exists with the no zoning policy, but remains participatory in order to safeguard the “neighborhood commons” whilst still maintaining this membership and stewardship of the land. The no zoning land policy, as it currently stands in Houston, in part meets Aldo Leopold’s criteria for the land ethic because the citizens are members of the land and it is treated as a shared land-community rather than a commodity controlled by government official(s) or political elites. However, to meet the criteria for the land ethic in whole, it must incorporate a flexible zoning policy that would seek to protect the “neighborhood common” (citizens interests and resources) while still respecting the land-community, which Olmsted values so

City governments are tasked with writing and enforcing zoning laws that define all aspects of private use of property within the city’s district. In order for businesses and other groups to build and use plots, or zones, of land that they own within the city’s district, they must get approval from various city government officials. Failure to meet zoning requirements for the specific use proposed, as interpreted by certain officials, results in denial of the entity from using their land for that purpose. On March 22nd, I attended a meeting of the Salt Lake City Planning Commission (PC). The meeting concerned approving group’s proposed usage of property they own. Specifically, I will write about the Other Side Academy’s (OSA) proposal to build

It was reflected in neighborhood property values, in the terms of mortgages, and in the way real chairs steered prospective buyers and countless other tactics that preserve the racial barrier. White who chose to ignore the color line faced a severe financial penalty, blacks usually had no choice in the matter. Through it all, the key programs of the 1949 Housing Act slum clearance in public housing were being used to reshape cities throughout the country, redistributing land and populations to suit those in power. Poor districts undesirable urban land was cleared for redevelopment but were rarely replaced with affordable housing. These neighborhoods were disproportionately black residents were scattered to segregated pockets throughout the city, new battles formed as the old were demolished. Urban renewal found a new name, “negro removal”. In the segregated city, blacks paid more for worse housing with fewer amenities, older hospitals, higher food prices, less police protection. It seemed like the government was going to support poor people, giving people a few pieces of dollars to live on, then they were going to extract blood form tangents. People were going to live according to the rules from such-and-such policies, and the rules just happened to be very relentless, sometimes

When people talk about racism throughout modern society, a question that emerges is “How does modern racism influence residency and neighborhoods in economic and political viewpoints?” Some argue that segregation within the housing market has been a devastating, long-term, issue for African Americans as a result of racial zoning due to income along with race, while others believe that the United States has indeed enforced policies to prevent blacks from obtaining and maintaining wealth to merge with white communities. My own view is that there is not an individual economic or political reason to link the issue of residential segregation, but a combination of both working with one another to promote this notion of residential segregation. Evidence to support my claim include an understanding of what racism actually is, either systematic, institutional, or prejudice throughout modern society. Then, racism understood throughout the housing market with political and economic support. Furthermore, what racial zoning is and its effect on neighborhood value, such as economics, politics and education. Finally, historic evidence and witness accounts to support residential segregation, and opinions on the matter.

Inclusionary zoning requires all developers to produce a percentage of affordable housing units along with the development of market rate units. The goals of the program are to create mixed income neighborhoods; produce affordable housing for a diverse labor force; seek equitable growth of new residents; and increase homeownership opportunities for low and moderate income levels.

Zoning is arguably the root of both structural and racial/economic segregation that occurs within a city. The motives behind exclusionary zoning are fueled by the desire to preserve the integrity of specific communities and areas at the expense of one or multiple social groups. This process is more apparent in residential zoning, but the concept can be seen in various urban components, even elements as simple as infrastructure. Federal highways have shown to be a vehicle of segregation by serving as literal boundaries between neighborhoods of different races. These highways support ‘white flight’ and also allow for the ‘flight’ of jobs into the suburbs as well; this phenomenon leaves black and other minority neighborhoods economically deprived as industry begins to

Zoning ordinances and laws within a municipality are a necessity to keep order and the protection of the neighborhoods. More importantly, the objective of zoning laws is to restrict individuals from utilizing their property in a manner that could make the community less pleasing or a possible buyer less likely to purchase a house in the neighborhood (Forman, 2000). Civil and criminal penalties are levied for not complying with the zoning laws and ordinances. Municipalities are permitted to have their zoning laws enforced, to obtain injunctions, and to request the courts to address criminal endorsement against any violations (Forman, 2000). Statutory law is associated with zoning laws and ordinances within a municipality.

After racially restrictive covenants and Federal Housing Administration practices were deemed racist and immoral, the damage was already done. Black families living in previously marked “red zones” could not afford to move out of their segregated and underdeveloped neighborhoods. The public schools in these districts suffered as well because of the decreasing values of the properties and the high concentration of low income residents. Necessary educational resources in these areas dwindle and, as a result, academic score gaps widen, the dropout rate increases and children fail to find reasons to

Mary Madden and Joel Russel in their article “Part 1: What Is a Form-Based Code?” talk about renewing communities’ zoning ordinates and different ways of their achievement. A form-based code (FBC) is a way to control building form and use, with the purpose of accomplishing an appropriate built environment. Zoning itself was created as a result of the Industrial Revolution. During the 20th century, people started separating cities and towns into zones. There are different parameters and requirements which influence building forms such as “dwelling units per acre” and “floor area ratios”. However, the authors remark that such regulations are too broad, they do not specify the height of the building or how it will relate to the street and other

Systemic racism, as it operates in the United States, is a multifaceted program intended to deprive, and maintain deprivation. This has been achieved through outright violence and entrapment, but also through the abridgement of “freedoms” and opportunity. Housing discrimination is a varying, but always pernicious part of this program. In the Northern United States, housing discrimination has operated on a paradigm, spanning from overt and violently enforced segregation, to more furtive forms of discrimination (that often hide behind the veil of “public policy” or the “free market”).