Anti-Snob Land Use Laws, Suburban Exclusion, and Housing Opportunity

REFERENCES

• Advisory Commission on Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Housing (1991). “Not in my back yard”: Removing barriers to affordable housing. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Babcock, R. F. (1966). The zoning game: Municipal practices and policies. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Boger, J. C. (1997). Mount Laurel at 21 years: Reflections on the power of courts and legislatures to shape social change. Seton Hall Law Review, 27(4),1450–1470.
   Google Scholar
• Breagy, J. (1976). Overriding the suburbs. Boston, MA: Citizens Housing and Planning Association.
   Google Scholar
• Briffault, R. (1990). Our localism: Part I—The structure of local government law. Columbia Law Review, 90,1–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, K. D. (2001). Expanding affordable housing through inclusionary zoning: Lessons from the Washington metropolitan area. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954).
   Google Scholar
• Buchanan v. Warley, 245 U.S. 60 (1917).
   Google Scholar
• Burchell, R. W., Listokin, D., & Pashman, A. (1994). Regional housing opportunities for lower income households: A resource guide to affordable housing and regional mobility strategies. Washington, DC: Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• Calavita, N., & Grimes, K. (1998). Inclusionary housing in California: The experience of two decades. Journal of the American Planning Association, 64(2),150–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapter 774 of the Acts of 1969. Massachusetts General Laws Annotated, Chapter 40B, §§20–23 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Charles, C. Z. (2005). Can we live together? Racial preferences and neighborhood outcomes. InX. DeS. Briggs (Ed.), The geography of opportunity. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Davidoff, P., & Davidoff, L. (1971). Opening the suburbs: Toward inclusionary land use controls. Syracuse Law Review, 22, 509–536.
   Google Scholar
• Dietderich, A. G. (1996). An egalitarian’s market: The economics of inclusionary zoning reclaimed. Fordham Urban Journal, 24, 23–104.
   Google Scholar
• Downs, A. (1973). Opening up the suburbs: An urban strategy for America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edgar, R. (2003). Towns take on R. I. housing law. The Providence Journal, p. A1.
   Google Scholar
• Edmonds, S. (1980). Housing needs studies: The Massachusetts experience. Boston, MA: Citizens Housing and Planning Association.
   Google Scholar
• Ellickson, R. C. (1981). The irony of inclusionary zoning. Southern California Law Review, 54, 1167–1216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farley, R., Fielding, E., & Krysan, M. (1997). The residential preferences of blacks and whites: A four metropolis analysis. Housing Policy Debate, 8(4),763–800.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farley, R., Steeh, C., Jackson, T., Krysan, M., & Reeves, K. (1993). Continued racial residential segregation in Detroit: ‘Chocolate City, Vanilla Suburbs’ revisited. Journal of Housing Research, 4(1),1–38.
   Google Scholar
• Feins, J. D. (2005). A cross-site analysis of MTO’s locational impacts. InJ. Goering & J. D. Feins (Eds.), Choosing a better life?: Evaluating the Moving to Opportunity social experiment. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fischel, W. A. (1985). The economics of zoning laws: A property rights approach to American land use controls. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gale, D. E. (1992). Eight state-sponsored growth management programs: A comparative analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58(4), 425–439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galster, G., & Rothenberg, J. (1991). Filtering in urban housing: A graphical analysis of a quality-segmented market. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 11, 37–50.
   Google Scholar
• Goering, J. (2005). Political origins and opposition. InJ. Goering & J. D. Feins (Eds.), Choosing a better life?: Evaluating the Moving to Opportunity social experiment. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goetz, E. G. (2005). Clearing the way: Deconcentrating the poor in urban America. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Herr, P. B., &Associates (2000). Zoning for housing affordability. A study prepared for the Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Hollister, T. S. (1999). Presentation to Stamford Regional Bar Association, January 14, 1999. The data are on file with this author.
   Google Scholar
• James v. Valtierra, 402 U.S. 137 (1971).
   Google Scholar
• Krefetz, S. P. (2001). The impact and evolution of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit and Zoning Appeals Act: Thirty Years of experience with a state legislative effort to overcome exclusionary zoning. Western New England Law Review, 22(2), 381–430.
   Google Scholar
• Lohe, W. (2000). The Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Law: Collaboration between affordable housing advocates and environmentalists. Land Use Law & Zoning Digest, May.
   Google Scholar
• Lohe, W. (2001). Command and control to local control: The environmental agenda and the Comprehensive Permit Law. Western New England Law Review, 22(2), 355–380.
   Google Scholar
• Long, J. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Lowry, I. S., & Ferguson, B. W. (1992). Development regulation and housing affordability. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Luger, M. I., & Temkin, K. (2000). Red tape and housing costs: How regulation affects new residential development. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
   Google Scholar
• Mallach, A. (1984). Inclusionary housing programs: Policies and practices. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
   Google Scholar
• Malpezzi, S. (1996). Housing prices, externalities, and regulation in U.S. metropolitan areas. Journal of Housing Policy Research, 7(2), 209–242.
   Google Scholar
• Massey, D. S., & Denton, N. A. (1993). American apartheid: Segregation and the making of the underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meck, S., Retzlaff, R., & Schwab, J. (2003). Regional approaches to affordable housing. Chicago: American Planning Association.
   Google Scholar
• Mueller, D. C. (1989). Public choice II: A revised edition of public choice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nenno, M. K. (1991). State and local governments: New initiatives in low-income housing preservation. Housing Policy Debate, 2(2), 467–497.
   Google Scholar
• Payne, J. M. (1996). Norman Williams, exclusionary zoning, and the Mount Laurel doctrine: Making the theory fit the facts. Vermont Law Review, 20, 665–686.
   Google Scholar
• Pendall, R. (2000). Local land use regulation and the chain of exclusion. Journal of the American Planning Association, 66(2), 125–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popkin, S. J., Galster, G. C., Temkin, K., Herbig, C., Levy, D. K., & Richer, E. K. (2003). Obstacles to desegregating public housing: Lessons learned from implementing eight consent decrees. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 22(2), 179–199.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Public Acts 89-311, Title 8, Chapter 126a, Connecticut General Statutes, §8-30g, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Public Laws of 1991, Chapter 154, §1, Rhode Island General Laws 45-54-1 et seq., 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Reed, E. F. (1981). Tilting at windmills: The Massachusetts low and moderate income housing Act. Western New England Law Review, 4, 105–132.
   Google Scholar
• Rohe, W. M. (2000). What will it take to disperse affordable housing: Comments on the Housing and Community Development conference papers, presentations and discussion. Unpublished manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• Roisman, F. W. (1997). The role of the state, the necessity of race-conscious remedies, and other lessons from the Mount Laurel study. Seton Hall Law Review, 27(4), 1386–1425.
   Google Scholar
• Rolleston, B. S. (1987). Determinants of restrictive suburban zoning: An empirical analysis. Journal of Urban Economics, 21, 1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, E., Harris, L., & Denton, N. A. (2005). New places, new faces. InJ. Goering & J. D. Feins (Eds.), Choosing a better life?: Evaluating the Moving to Opportunity social experiment. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rothenberg, J., Galster, G. C., Butler, R. V., & Pitkin, J. (1991). The maze of urban housing markets. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ruben, E. A., & Williams, C. (1979). Comprehensive permits: For housing lower income households in Massachusetts. Boston: Citizens Housing and Planning Association.
   Google Scholar
• Rubinowitz, L. S., & Rosenbaum, J. E. (2000). Crossing the class and color lines: From public housing to white suburbia. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Salsich, P. W., Jr. (2003). The impact of land use laws on affordable housing. Retrieved April 10, 2005 from http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/BluePrintDocs/LandUseLaws.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Shroder, M. (2005). Locational constraint, housing counseling, and successful lease-up. InJ. Goering & J. D. Feins (Eds.), Choosing a better life?: Evaluating the Moving To Opportunity social experiment. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
   Google Scholar
• Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Township of Mt. Laurel (Mount Laurel I), 336 A.2d 713 (N.J.), appeal dismissed & cert. denied, 423 U.S. 808 (1975).
   Google Scholar
• Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Township of Mt. Laurel (Mount Laurel II), 92 N.J. 158, 456 A.2d 390 (1983).
   Google Scholar
• State-Sponsored Growth Management as a Remedy for Exclusionary Zoning. (1995). Harvard Law Review, 108, 1127–1144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stegman, M. A. (1990). A review of production under New Jersey’s Mount Laurel inclusionary housing process. InR. W. Burchell (Ed.), Affordable housing paper series (draft copy).
   Google Scholar
• Stegman, M. A., Quercia, R. G., & McCarthy, G. (2000). Housing America’s working families. New Century Housing, 1(1), 1–48.
   Google Scholar
• Stockman, P. K. (1992). Note: Anti-snob zoning in Massachusetts: Assessing one attempt at opening the suburbs to affordable housing. Virginia Law Review, 78, 535–579.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stonefield, S. (2001). Affordable housing in suburbia: The importance but limited power and effectiveness of the state override tool. Western New England Law Review, 22(2), 323–354.
   Google Scholar
• Terner, I. D., & Cook, T. B. (1990). New directions for federal housing policy: The role of the states. InD. DiPasquale & L. C. Keyes (Eds.), Building foundations. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tiebout, C. M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64, 416–424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (2000). Rental housing assistance—The worsening crisis: A report to Congress on worst case housing needs. Washington, DC: Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD, 2000).
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (2005). “Why not in our community?: Removing barriers to affordable housing. Washington, DC: Office of Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD, 2005).
   Google Scholar
• Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corporation, 429 U.S. 252 (1977).
   Google Scholar
• Wheeler, M. (1990). Resolving local regulatory disputes and building consensus for affordable housing. InD. DiPasquale & L. C. Keyes (Eds.), Building foundations. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wish, N. B., & Eisdorfer, S. (1997). The impact of Mount Laurel initiatives: An analysis of the characteristics of applicants and occupants. Seton Hall Law Review, 27(4), 1268–1337.
   Google Scholar