Arbitrary Lines: How Zoning Broke the American City and How to Fix It

by M. Nolan Gray

What if scrapping one flawed policy could bring US cities closer to addressing debilitating housing shortages, stunted growth and innovation, persistent racial and economic segregation, and car-dependent development?
 
It’s time for America to move beyond zoning, argues city planner M. Nolan Gray in Arbitrary Lines: How Zoning Broke the American City and How to Fix It. With lively explanations and stories, Gray shows why zoning abolition is a necessary—if not sufficient—condition for building more affordable, vibrant, equitable, and sustainable cities.
 
The arbitrary lines of zoning maps across the country have come to dictate where Americans may live and work, forcing cities into a pattern of growth that is segregated and sprawling.
 
The good news is that it doesn’t have to be this way. Reform is in the air, with cities and states across the country critically reevaluating zoning. In cities as diverse as Minneapolis, Fayetteville, and Hartford, the key pillars of zoning are under fire, with apartment bans being scrapped, minimum lot sizes dropping, and off-street parking requirements disappearing altogether. Some American cities—including Houston, America’s fourth-largest city—already make land-use planning work without zoning.
 
In Arbitrary Lines, Gray lays the groundwork for this ambitious cause by clearing up common confusions and myths about how American cities regulate growth and examining the major contemporary critiques of zoning. Gray sets out some of the efforts currently underway to reform zoning and charts how land-use regulation might work in the post-zoning American city.
 
Despite mounting interest, no single book has pulled these threads together for a popular audience. In Arbitrary Lines, Gray fills this gap by showing how zoning has failed to address even our most basic concerns about urban growth over the past century, and how we can think about a new way of planning a more affordable, prosperous, equitable, and sustainable American city.
 

Genres: Urbanism, Urban Planning, Nonfiction, Politics, History, Cities, Economics

240 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2022

Reviews

[Logan Price · Rating 5 out of 5]

Thanks to this book, I'm officially convinced that if cities are to become more affordable, productive, integrated, and environmentally friendly then we must abolish zoning. Not only does zoning not accomplish what it promises, it has far too many harmful effects to justify keeping it. And while this topic could easily be dense or boring, Gray makes it very accessible and shows how it affects every American city and — as a result — every American.

Catch me at my local zoning meetings trying to get rid of single-family zoning and parking minimums.

[Josh Goodman · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thought this was great. It does a good job giving an overview of the history and mechanism of zoning without being too dry. Coming into this book I was completely on board with serious zoning reform and moving toward a transit-oriented development scheme but I hadn't given much thought to the idea of zoning abolition before. In my mind "zoning abolition" conjured up pure chaos, but I thought the book did a great job of distinguishing between zoning and the idea of land use regulations in general, which are often conflated since zoning is so central to land use in the American context. In the end I think I'm sold on the book's thesis: that zoning serves as far more of a hindrance than an asset, that intelligent centralized planning can exist outside of the framework of zoning, and, very importantly, that replacing zoning with more flexible regulations that are friendly to density and transit is necessary but not sufficient for making cities better and more livable in the future.

[David Bjelland · Rating 4 out of 5]

Handy, broadly accessible, straight-to-the-point survey of what it says on the tin.

... Well, maybe the one way it might be even more transparent and direct is changing the title to Arbitrary Lines: How Zoning Broke the American City and How to Fix It Why We Should Abolish It :), but I know publishers always choose the subtitles.

Mostly, the arguments here are things I'm well-beyond convinced of and truly feel most people, across a variety of political persuasions, could get behind. But one I know I'll be chewing on with ambivalence for a while is his case about economic stagnation.

In short (and I swear I'm trying to accurately and fairly condense his argument here):
* Certain cities at certain times become hotspots of technological, economic, and cultural innovation / opportunities
* These hotspots naturally draw ambitious specialized workers from lower-opportunity areas, leading to a virtuous cycle of knowledge spillover, leading to multiplier effects that then draw working class people across all sectors and levels of specialization; more efficient labor capitalization => more growth (not just in the hotspot region but nationally as well) => more good
* Decades of restrictive zoning have led to a housing crisis that shuts the gates on this natural demographic osmosis; middle class and working class alike are locked out by a housing market that'd eat up far more than the increased earnings of being in a high-opportunity area.

This is where his cringey Lib-Optimism side shines through the brightest, and what makes it truly uncomfortable is that ... I can't really disagree with the broad outlines of the argument, and I definitely share all his policy goals? But to make one of the main pillars of the book's anti-zoning argument, alongside and co-equal with "it's created a supply/affordability crisis", "it perpetuates inequality and segregation", and "it's environmentally unsustainable" ... "it prevents workers from most efficiently chasing the currents of increasingly liquid, highly-concentrated capital"? Well, for one, it doesn't really answer the question, "what about the people who get left behind after we abolish zoning and the brain drain kicks into overdrive?" Not that I think people should be forced to stay in lower-opportunity areas because of the housing crisis (as they currently are), of course. But... at the very least, there is a gut-level plausibility to the idea that the affordability crisis might, paradoxically, exert some force against accelerating inequality, by disincentivizing entrepreneur-types and specialized workers from concentrating in the flashpoint cities and instead working their economic magic in a less intense but more distributed way... right? And that it's an idea that might even call out for refutal in some readers' minds? Even if in reality, he's not unsympathetic to the plight of those who would get left behind in a properly liquid market of human and housing capitol, the fact that it's the mobile, aspirational working class cast as the sympathetic hero leaves... a certain taste in the mouth.

To reiterate, these are just quibbles about the messaging and arguments Gray and his editor choose to prioritize developing in the limited page count available. But, it'd be negligent of me as a left-ish person on the internet if I didn't do my part in stifling good policy ideas with sanctimonious nit-picking and in-fighting ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Justin Gehrts · Rating 2 out of 5]

When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

No, I'm not referring to zoning's approach to development; I'm referring to my impression of how the autheor sees the world. Does he lay out some compelling arguments? Yes, and then subsequently contradicts himself (San Jose only allows single-family homes in most of the city - but also California banned single-family zoning - how can both be true?) or offers examples that are baffling (like saying that having no zoning will reduce car-centric development but then devotes an entire chapter to Houston while hand-waving its ever-expanding freeways).

Do I have a further appreciation for the issues that zoning can create and has created? Yes. Do I think the author does it in a way that warrants an entire book rather than a long-ish article? No.

[Santi Ruiz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Review for the Free Beacon pending!

[Bill Bookworm · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good intro book but no Human Transit or High Cost of Free Parking

[Mona · Rating 4 out of 5]

yeah zoning is evil and should be abolished, but this book provides an easy to read, nuanced history / description of zoning and argument for abolishing it.

[Haley Baumeister · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an accessible, clear, thorough, and practical guide to zoning. That may seem boring to some, irrelevant to the everyday life of others — but Gray does an excellent job showing how this is a huge aspect of life that truly affects everyone.

The housing famine and affordability crisis is surely the most obvious. But he spells out other trickle-down effects I had not thought of, which are certainly current hurdles to many people for building a thriving life.

I was especially fascinated by his example of Houston, the absolute anomaly without zoning that is actually….. doing great. A growing, prosperous, diverse, creatively resourceful city that continues to attract people with its simultaneously affordable housing. How many other major cities in the US can say the same?

And when I thought about it, I had chalked it up to “Texas being big & cheap” (I lived in San Antonio for a few years) but as he points out: Austin hasn’t changed—let alone gotten rid of—its zoning for decades and now has an insane, restrictive, and expensive housing market just like every other major city of opportunity. The amount of people flocking from (or otherwise restricted from moving to) Austin and other such cities due to housing costs is a phenomenon with more compounding effects sure to come.

People, families, employers—not to mention overall city culture and vitality—lose when we trap our city codes in amber. Human flourishing is surely worth an honest revisiting of such laws.

Zoning reform (if not abolition) is going to be my new pro-natalist shtick. 😎

And if you haven’t checked out the work over at Strong Towns (where Gray contributes), take a look around. They consistently do some wonderfully ambitious and creative work.

[Max Bertellotti · Rating 1 out of 5]

While the history of zoning and the arguments against single-family zoning, minimum lot sizes, etc. are laid out clearly in this book, Gray makes a series of logical leaps about zoning at-large that lend a reader to lose faith in the veracity of his claims. Gray does not make a cohesive logical argument for abolishing zoning, and as the book progresses it becomes ever more awkward for the reader to observe Gray’s increasingly flowery language and his misplaced certainty, seeming naive to the fact that his theory of zoning is a theory.

Though from the outset of reading this book I have agreed with most of Gray’s takes on zoning, density, and housing affordability, I find myself challenged to finish this book because it reads as if written by someone who believes themself able to translate 25-like echo chambered tweets into the next Evicted. It is not the next Evicted. Ironically and unfortunately, Gray implies one or two dog whistles himself.

Gray clearly cares, and is more right than he is wrong, but his book is too arrogant and his writing style gives too much ammunition to those people who critique urbanists, academics, and out-of-touch DC liberals who believe the Metro PCS on Florida Ave. is too noisy.

[Erika Brandt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great analysis and I learned a lot. But also veeeery skeptical about the idea that offering deed restrictions as concessions to rich people in exchange for removing zoning would result in a net positive in terms of equity and affordability. Also - housing markets are segmented! Any “market urbanism” solution that relies solely on raising the cap on supply and crossing your fingers for trickle-down affordability benefits, especially in gentrifying markets, deserves a hard side-eye in my book. I don’t know that this was quite Nolan’s take, but it felt pretty close. All in all, though — yes, let’s get rid of zoning and DEFINITELY single family zoning!

[melhara]

This book and author was featured in the Talking Headways podcast, Episode 398: The Arbitrary Lines of Zoning. Based on the podcast, it appears that the book/author offers a very critical view of zoning frameworks and an explanation as to why we should abolish zoning. I personally like zoning and see the benefit of it, but there is certainly a lot that can be improved upon (especially since most zoning by-laws are outdated). I'm definitely curious to read more about it, and learn about how zoning is implemented in USA vs. Canada.

[Celine Cedeño · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was such a helpful read in breaking down zoning and the long term effects it has in America. I am honestly shocked at how it’s over 100 years old now.

Chapter 9: The Great Unzoned City, made me fall in love again with Houston and now I will admire so many different things.

This guy got me reading every section of city ordinances now 😬

[Hunter Lybbert · Rating 4 out of 5]

After putting up with the more dry parts explaining the history and technical details of zoning, I found this book really eye opening and interesting. It was especially shocking to see what role zoning is playing in increasing home/property values and creating a housing crisis. It’s also sad how it’s been used to perpetuate segregation and inequality economically and racially. Definitely a paradigm shifter. Gonna keep learning about city planning and urbanism woohoo!

[Benjamin Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent introductory book to zoning policy as a potent unseen force that shapes our cities and lives. If you’re curious about how cities can grow/become more affordable/encourage more sustainable communities, this is a great read #yimby

[Zack Subin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Several books and numerous articles have now been written detailing the excesses of zoning and their role in making America less prosperous, more unaffordable, more inequitable, and less sustainable. In beautifully crisp prose, Gray takes the case a step further in a compelling argument that zoning should not be reformed but abolished.

Urban planning is several millennia old (in the Western tradition), but zoning only a century. Gray retells the origins of zoning as not incidentally but fundamentally about exclusion and protection of elite interests. The supposed benefits of zoning (to be outweighed against the disadvantages of excess, in the emerging consensus), such as protecting city residents from externalities and aligning new growth with supportive infrastructure, are revealed to be illusory. More direct approaches to solving these challenges were already in existence and making progress -- the great sanitation and public health advances of the late nineteenth century predated zoning -- and zoning has proven by comparison to be both an incredibly blunt and ineffective instrument.

The city of Houston is arguably none the worse for its lack of zoning (excessive car-dependence and sprawl is a fact of nearly all US cities built or expanded post-WWII, and the worst areas of new sprawl around the periphery have been separately incorporated with conventional suburban zoning approaches). In fact its lack of zoning has allowed it to retain a level of nimble planning, housing affordability, and diversity surpassing most US cities. Its lack of zoning does not mean it has no building restrictions, and Gray argues these fall into one of three categories: (1) exceptions that provide an escape valve for the most pro-zoning constituencies, such as deed restrictions which allow homeowners to opt out of change on a minority of land without putting the whole city in a straitjacket; (2) effective regulation of nuisances like noise and smells; and (3) zoning-like features that crept in like minimum parking, setbacks, and minimum lot sizes. For the latter, Gray argues they are holdovers currently being reformed. Notably, the slashing of minimum lot size in 1998 (extended from the core to the entire city in 2013) helped to accommodate a level core infill development nearly unparalleled among large US cities in the last few decades.

Gray closes by arguing that liberating cities from zoning could also liberate planners to actually plan, redirecting them to solving the problems exacerbated by zoning as well as address climate resilience and other emergent urban challenges of the 21st century.

[Pete · Rating 5 out of 5]

Arbitrary Lines : How Zoning Broke the American City and How to Fix It (2022) by Nolan Gray is an excellent look at the problems that zoning has caused in the US. Nolan Gray has worked as a city planner in various US cities and is now doing a PhD in urban planning.

For anyone looking for a book to explain the Yes in my back yard (YIMBY) movement this is about the best book around. Gray has front line experience with the problems caused by zoning and the theoretical background to see the problems.

The book has three parts, in the first the origins of zoning and how zoning works are discussed. In the second part the issues with zoning are described and in the third part solutions to the problems of zoning are put forward. Gray writes well and the book is not too long but is long enough to make it’s points well.

There is a whole chapter on how Houston works without zoning that makes Gray’s points particularly well. It’s strange to see a problem where there is a place where the problem has been solved. The common objection that deed restrictions in Houston are the same as zoning is rebutted well by Gray. The most crucial reason being “For starters, deed restrictions only cover an estimated quarter of the city.”. Gray doesn’t comment on the fact that Houston is only about 25% cheaper than Dallas either. He also doesn’t mention that Houston is a very car dependent sprawling city. These facts may not be to some people’s taste. But sprawl is fairly cheap, indeed building 1-2 story dwelling is half the cost per square meter of high rise. But the issue with zoning preventing conversion into high rise when land prices become high enough is exactly what Houston deals with. Gray makes the very interesting point that ‘in 1019, Houston built roughly the same number of apartments as Los Angeles, despite the latter being nearly twice as large’.

Arbitrary Lines is a really excellent book though. It’s US focused which is fair enough. There is some mention of the UK but the issues that zoning has caused in places like Australia isn’t mentioned. Gray writes really clearly and the book is very readable. Along with ‘Order Without Design’ by Alain Bertaud it’s one of the best books on zoning, cities and how housing costs can be lowered.

[Steven Palmer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Extremely efficient and well-put-together argument that goes beyond the current YIMBY trend of reforming zoning to a much bolder place: that we don’t need zoning whatsoever. After this book, I’m convinced.

In short, the (relatively new) practice of zoning serves only to perpetuate racial segregation, worsen the climate crisis, and keep poor people poor. Beyond these negative externalities, there aren’t even any real benefits to zoning! Get rid of it and let our cities be for all of the people.

[Mad Hab · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing!

[Keen Reader · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Zoning regulates uses and densities on private land – nothing more, nothing less.”
“Zoning is a tool of segregation.”
“Zoning doesn’t build buildings-it can only stop them from being built.”

Zoning in the US began in earnest back in 1916, pioneered by the so called father of American zoning, Edward Bassett. Like many dated and bureaucratic entities, it has a long and established culture of being slow to see or acknowledge change and even slower to respond to it in helpful ways. It was interesting to learn that Houston, the fourth largest city in the country, is the only major city in the US not to have zoning. They’ve put it to the vote three times in 1948, 1962 and 1993 and each time the citizens rejected it. A rare example of the masses conquering over the greed of a few.

At one point we learn that New York City may be the greenest settlement in all of the US, he explains that,

“New Yorkers consume far less energy, gasoline and land per resident while producing less in the way of pollution, trash and greenhouse gas emissions than their suburban peers.”

“The typical resident of Vermont-renowned for its commitment to environmentalist causes-consumes three and a half times as much gasoline per year as the typical resident of NYC. Narrow it down to the most densely built part of the city-Manhattan-and Vermonters use six times as much gasoline.”

We are also told that the major Californian cities are more energy efficient because California’s famously temperate climate minimizes the need for energy-intensive climate control.

He makes a good point on showing us what zoning isn’t too, and how in particular it’s so often confused with town planning, which it has nothing to do with. And as Gray says, just because it has no zoning, doesn’t mean it has no rules, deed restrictions remains the principal regulator of land use, and we see that they also have stricter rules on issues like noise regulation, as well as laws to do with light pollution and flood prevention.

“Abolishing zoning doesn’t mean the end of planning-on the contrary, it’s only the beginning of a new chapter in planning.”

“Over 80% of all large metropolitan areas in the US were more racially segregated in 2019 than they were in 1990.” And not only that, but we also learn that, “Racial segregation is most acute not in the South but in the Mid-west and mid-Atlantic regions.”

I learned a lot from this and Gray is always engaging and always accessible, providing plenty of useful photos and other illustrations too, which help boost its appeal, and ultimately this amounts to a really persuasive body of evidence against zoning and certainly gives plenty of thought to those who should be paying attention to such books.

[Kyle Jones · Rating 4 out of 5]

Arbitrary lines perfectly articulates the argument for the abolition of zoning. It covers the history of zoning, the implications of zoning, and what cities can look like without zoning. Rather than just leaving it open ended with no solutions this book offered the solutions on how cities land use policy could operate. It did convince me that there is a root to the problem in which American cities are developed and governments are wasting time tinkering with zoning policy. That being said, I am giving this book of four stars because while it does highlight the immense need, I felt it failed to display the social implications and reactionary pushback that the abolition will receive, and how it may be a risk to completely abolish it without mandating a comprehensive plan. I personally see value with slowly breaking down Zoning prior to its abolition. Right now the steps cities are taking with banning parking minimums, ending single family only zoning, and TOD zones are good leeway’s into abolishing zoning if that’s in a cities agenda.

I also thought there was a massive blind spot in the Houston chapter. The blind spot being Houston is arguably the worst sprawled metropolis in the USA. I know Nolan acknowledged Houston isn’t perfect, but I argue it’s far from it and shows that while abolishing zoning could reframe land use policy, Houston is a prime example that other regulations must be put into place prior to the abolition to prevent sprawl.

[Natalie Silver · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty disappointing, to be honest. The author is a director at California YIMBY and his whole argument is abundance — we need to abolish zoning and build more everywhere we can. I actually take pretty significant issue with this abundance-first model because I think sprawl is a greater concern that simply housing unaffordability/unavailability. I found the book to be lacking in a substantive discussion of reducing sprawl while also increasing density. For example, we should not celebrate Houston for having no zoning when they also have no public transit and highways divide the city. This book did not convince me that we should get rid of zoning, and my takeaway is more that the issue is with how uses are separated through zoning codes as they exist currently.

[Meg Y]

very informative once I locked in, if not a bit repetitive (take a shot every time you hear the phrase “locked in amber”) can’t really fault Gray that he’s not nearly as funny and charming as Jane Jacobs; not many people are 😔 main takeaway: I’m very open to the development of alternatives to our current system of zoning, and Gray is generous enough to give us some decent material for getting started! That bit about Houston was crazy, ur telling me direct democracy can actually work to benefit the majority what the hell….

[Caroline Krall · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think this book had a really great brief overview of what zoning is, what it has done to US cities and viable alternatives to zoning. To me a lot of this was pretty redundant from things I’ve read/heard before but I think it is a great introductory text!

[Allegra · Rating 4 out of 5]

easy to understand, good analysis, well argued (speaking as a zoning administrator!)

[d.f · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5

This book was not what I was expecting after hearing N. Nolan Gray speak on a podcast. I though this was going to be more of a history of red lining and the negative effects of zoning, and to be fair the book did a bit of a cursory review of those topics, but mostly it felt like a tribute capitalism and the benevolence of the market. It’s still worth the read (or listen as I did via audiobook), mostly because it is incredibly timely and as our states and cities look toward addressing the affordability crisis more people need to become versed in the topic.

Gray posits an interesting premise — abolishing zoning will increase affordable housing and create more equity. I don’t buy it though.

I do not share his confidence that a laissez faire approach will solve problems and trickle down benefits to historically marginalized populations instead of creating more of an advantage for business and developers. I don’t see how entirely removing zoning will alleviate the historic challenges. I don’t see how less “onerous” community engagement will benefit communities. I don’t see how it will some how spread the nuisance out so that even the more affluent will have to bear the costs. I don’t see how fewer environmental studies will benefit the environment. I just don’t buy it.

However, I do agree that we need some of the reforms outlined. We need to increase density even in areas that have historically been single family homes. We need to allow auxiliary unit dwellings. We need to invest in affordable housing and it needs to be targeted toward areas that are thriving/more affluent. We need to allow for more mixed use development.

I just wasn’t convinced that the way to go about this is to abolish zoning. In spite of growing up in an era when pure capitalism and the laissez fair approach to everything was the golden calf to be worshiped as the only way I just can’t get behind it. I’ve seen too many people left behind and forgotten by it.

So let’s reform and increase density.

[Evan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gray does a strong job at the first part of the book, talking about the problems caused by overly aggressive zoning work. The second piece - how to fix it - is less strong.

It's clear people mean various different things when they say "zoning." Gray defines it pretty narrowly, to be about uses and density. Gray also brings the perspective of big cities, without much perspective or understanding of smaller city zoning.

While I find myself generally agreeing with the decades-old assertion that we've overzoned and overcontrolled development, to the benefit of the few, I don't think the assertion that private zoning (through CC&Rs or deed restrictions) is the solution. It seems just as inequitable. It seems overly optimistic that the market (in a totally non-free market situation, vastly skewed by subsidies for car use and other things) will provide socially optimal solutions; or that cities have enough staff to facilitate neighbor resolutions from incompatible uses.

Not to say I have the right solution - though a good step would be reducing how much we overregulate densities and use types.

I'd recommend the book for people trying to understand what zoning is and why some applications are problematic.

[Adam Carrico · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent overview of the current state of public zoning and a compelling argument for abolition. The writing is accesible for such a complex topic. I appreciated the detailed history of zoning and look at how it works in the modern city. Although abolition may be ideal, there were many pragmatic actions described to move toward a more favorable state of city planning. More than anything, the chapters on cities post-zoning covered a wide range of concerns and provided specific solutions.

I highly recommend this book to anyone concerned about the affordability and livability of our cities and towns. It’s one thing to gripe about urban issues, but another to progress to a more favorable state. This book helps outline the path.

[Alex Hendel · Rating 5 out of 5]

An easy and fun read, this book is a great intro to what zoning is, how it has impacted American life, and how we can move past it. I would have preferred more detail, even in the appendix, but this book does what it sets out to do. As a primer, it’s the kind of book that every intro to urban planning student should read, and every normal person who wants to learn more CAN read.

[Trevor Cooper · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great overview of how zoning has led to the housing crisis and increasing economic and racial segregation. Also just a good explanation of the differences between zoning laws and other planning, building, environmental, and other codes for anyone unfamiliar with the topic.

The only thing keeping this from 5 stars is Gray's conclusion that, in part, restrictive covenants can replace zoning laws, using Houston's opt-in and public enforcement program as an example.

Restrictive covenants have been used to the same degree as zoning laws, if not moreso, to perpetuate racial and economic segregation. In some cases, this was done explicitly, until the United States Supreme Court's 1948 ruling in Shelley v. Kraemer that racial covenants in property deeds and agreements were unenforceable.

Today, restrictive covenants dating to the same period restricting uses in residential districts to single-family or homes worth not less than a certain dollar amount still perpetuate racial and economic segregation with the full blessing of the legal system. Redlining, the system by which state and federal agencies excluded Black and other POC communities from purchasing in certain white-majority neighborhoods, was based in part on analysis of desirable restrictive covenants of this type. Redlining is mentioned only in passing in Gray's analysis.

Further, restrictive covenants may be temporary but are more frequently granted in perpetuity, meaning that only by an argument of changed conditions or abandonment may a property be freed from the covenant. This would require the property owner, who has inherited a potentially century old covenant, to risk litigation by neighbors that could cost tens of thousands of dollars. Unless a significant number of neighbors also flagrantly disregard the covenants, or if the municipality can be petitioned to condemn the properties as limited to the covenants, the enforcers will likely win.

[Ridel · Rating 1 out of 5]

An author who is so biased as an American Democrat that he never considers his aims aren't universally beloved, and that it's worth investigating systems outside of the USA.

This book has an intellectual flair but quickly devolves into declarations without reasoning, evidence, or analysis. Statements are often true when achieving positive political aims, but false when achieving negative aims. Examples: Special interest groups can use zoning to segregate humanity, but they won't be able to use nuisance ordinances to do the same. For reasons. City planners can't possibly figure out all the complexities to declare where corner grocery stores should be, so you need to get rid of zoning restrictions. But they definitely can define where low income housing and parks should be, so you should give planners alternative tools to enforce something that's not zoning.

There's a great 10% of the book that explains what's going on in Austin TX, where they have no zoning. It should have been used to buttress declarations stated as fact (how elsewhere there is modern segregation but in a place without zoning, there isn't), but instead is left as nearly an afterthought at the end of the book. It's an unfortunate example of the author's mindset: they think their positions are self-evident so there's no reason to build a case.

There's also two or three sentences suggesting that Japan's prefecture-based zoning system is superior to the US municipal one, but he never actually explains Japan's system, provides examples supporting his claims, or even recalls Japan when he suggests what America should do next after abolishing zoning.

This book reflects the stereotypical American thinking that it's the entire world, combined with a level of political blindness that reminds me of religious fervour. I'm not American. I can't even understand why certain goals are priorities, much less desired.

You'd be better served reading Wikipedia for a summary of the American zoning system.