대한건축학회논문집:계획계 (Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design)

  • 제34권4호
  • /
  • Pages.123-131
  • /
  • 2018
  • /
  • 1226-9093(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2384-177X(eISSN)
대한건축학회 (Architectural Institute of Korea)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

혁신에서 배제로 - 미국 용도지역제의 등장과 진화 -

From Progressiveness to Exclusiveness - Appearance and Evolution of the U.S. Zoning System -

  • 김흥순 (한양대학교 도시공학과)
  • Kim, Heungsoon (Department of Urban Planning & Engineering, Hanyang University)
  • 투고 : 2017.09.27
  • 심사 : 2018.03.13
  • 발행 : 2018.04.30
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

This study discusses that the US zoning system came from "progressive movement" in the early 20th century. The US progressive movement was closely related with the scientific management movement in terms of efficiency. In that context, the ontological significance of zoning is found in realizing public interests by blocking external effects based on the value-neutral expertise. Another aspect of the US zoning system is the political one. It is closely related to progressive movement in common with efficiency. The zoning system was introduced as a measure to prevent the racial and class mixture resulting from the influx of immigrants. Today, the racial aspect of zoning is succeeded to exclusionary zoning. This study examines the fact that exclusive interests of US mainstream society have served as more important background than the fundamental aspect preventing external effects in the introduction and evolution of the zoning system.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Babcock, R. (1966). The Zoning Game, Madison, The University of Wisconsin Press.
  2. Babcock, R. & Bosselman, F. (1973). Exclusionary Zoning: Land Use Regulation and Housing in the 1970s, New York, Praeger Publishers.
  3. Barnett, J. (2008). Redesigning Cities: Principles, Practice, Implementation, Washington D.C., APA Planners Press.
  4. Benson, B. (2008). How land-use planning benefits big business over small, Published by Foundation for Economic Education, May 1.
  5. Cervero, R. (1996). Jobs-housing balance revisited, Journal of the American Planning Association, 62(4), 492-511. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369608975714
  6. Cho, J. (2004a). A study on the relationship between SZEA and SPEA in American planning system, Journal of the Korea Planners Association, 39(1), 7-19.
  7. Cho, J. (2004b). Appearance and advancement of the US zoning system, In Urban Planning History, Edited by Korea Planners Association, Seoul, Bo Sung Gak.
  8. Choe, B. (2011). A comparative study on urban planning system of England, Germany and the USA, The Korea Spatial Planning Review, 71, 133-148. https://doi.org/10.15793/kspr.2011.71..007
  9. Claeys, E.R. (2004). Euclid lives? The uneasy legacy of Progressivism in zoning, Fordham Law Review, 73(2), 731-770.
  10. Clingermayer, J. (1993). Distributive politics, ward representation, and the spread of zoning, Public Choice, 77, 725-738. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01047991
  11. Cullingworth, B. (2003). Planning in the USA, 2nd Edition, New York, Routledge.
  12. Feagin, J. (1989). Arenas of conflict - Zoning and land use reform in critical economic perspective, In Zoning and the American Dream, Edited by Haar, C. & Kayden J. Chicago, Planners Press.
  13. Fischel, W. (1985). The Economics of Zoning Laws: A Property Rights Approach to American Land Use Controls, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.
  14. Goldberg, J. (2008). Liberal Fascism, New York, Doubleday.
  15. Gyourko, J., Saiz, A. & Summers, A. (2008). A new measure of the local regulatory environment for housing markets - The Wharton residential land use regulatory index, Urban Studies, 45(3), 693-729 https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098007087341
  16. Haar, C.M. & Wolf, M.A. (2002). Euclid lives - The survival of progressive jurisprudence, Harvard Law Review, 115, 2158. https://doi.org/10.2307/1342530
  17. Hall, P. (1990). Cities of Tomorrow, Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
  18. Hogan, J.M. (2003). Rhetoric and Rreform in the Progressive Era. East Lansing, MI, Michigan State University Press.
  19. Ihlanfeldt, K. (2004). Exclusionary land-use regulations within suburban communities - A review of evidence and policy prescriptions, Urban Studies, 41(2), 261-283. https://doi.org/10.1080/004209803200165244
  20. Keyssar, A. (2009). The Right to Vote: The Contested History of Democracy in the United States. New York: Basic Books
  21. Kim, C. (2006). Land Is a Private Property!, Seoul, Nanam.
  22. Kim, J. & Jung, J. (2007). A comparative study on the land use systems of Korea and the US with a focus on property rights under the constitution, Journal of the Korea Planners Association, 42(4), 7-28.
  23. Kim, K. (1998). Introduction to Public Administration, Seoul, Bobmunsa
  24. Kim, S. (2014). A study on the land use regulation in the U.S. - Focusing on zoning system and zoning permits, Seoul Law Review, 22(1), 77-104. https://doi.org/10.15821/slr.2014.22.1.003
  25. Kim, S., Kim, S. & Kim, D. (2013). The problems and improvements of land use regulation in Korea, The Korea Spatial Planning Review, 78, 91-104. https://doi.org/10.15793/kspr.2013.78..006
  26. Kim, J., Potter, C. & Jung, H. (2013). Characteristics of and lessons from New York City's commercial district zoning, Urban Design, 15(6), 141-155.
  27. King, P. (1978). Exclusionary zoning and open housing: A brief judicial history, Geographical Review, 68(4): 459-469. https://doi.org/10.2307/214217
  28. Lee, J. (1985), A review of urban land use regulation, Urban Issues, 20(9), 8-22.
  29. Levy, J. (2016). Contemporary Urban Planning, 11th Edition, New York, Routledge.
  30. Malpezzi, S. (1996). Housing prices, externalities, and regulation in U.S. metropolitan areas, Journal of Housing Research, 7(2), 209-241.
  31. Nugent, W. (2010). Progressivism - A Very Short Introduction, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
  32. Park, J. (2006). Building History of the White Country, Seoul, Alpi.
  33. Pendall, R. (2000). Local land use regulation and the chain of exclusion. Journal of the American Planning Association, 66(2), 125-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360008976094
  34. Perman, M. (2001). Struggle for Mastery: Disfranchisement in the South, 1888-1908. Chapel Hill, NC, University of North Carolina Press.
  35. Seigan, B. (1990). Land use regulations should preserve - Only vital and pressing government interests, Cato Journal, 10(1), 127-158.
  36. Silver, C. (1997). The Racial Origins of Zoning in American Cities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
  37. Smith, K.B. (2011). Governing States and Localities, Washington, D.C., CQ Press
  38. Staley, S. (2012). The progressive roots of zoning, Published by Foundation for Economic Education, March 28.
  39. Staley, S. & Scarlett, L. (1998). Market-oriented planning - Principles and tools for the 21st century, Planning and Markets, 1(1), http://www-pam.usc.edu/volume1/v1i1a5s1.html#staley_contents.
  40. Tretter, E.M. (2012). Austin Restricted: Progressivism, Zoning, Private Racial Covenants, and the Making of a Segregated City, The Institute for Urban Policy Research and Analysis, the University of Texas at Austin, TX.