Burgess and Hoyt's Urban Models: Concentric Zones and Sectors, Study Guides, Projects, Research of Business

An overview of ernest burgess's concentric zone model and homer hoyt's sector model, two influential urban planning theories. Burgess identified concentric rings of land use around a city center, while hoyt expanded upon this idea by recognizing the impact of transport routes on land use and the development of sectors. The components and limitations of each model, as well as their relevance to understanding urban development.

Typology: Study Guides, Projects, Research

2021/2022

Uploaded on 09/27/2022

vernon
vernon 🇺🇸

4.8

(5)

216 documents

1 / 4

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
1
BURGESS’S CONCENTRIC ZONE MODEL
The Burgess Model was developed by Ernest Burgess in 1925. He identified a series
of concentric rings coming out from the centre of the city which correspond to different types
of land use. In the centre was the Central Business District; followed by an inner city area
known as the transition zone, with light manufacturing; then a series of residential zones
gradually becoming wealthier towards the edge of the city.
Burgess‟s original model was entirely based on Chicago. The sloping line through the
centre shows the shore of Lake Michigan. To the left of this line Burgess labelled the reality
of Chicago with names and types of places; to the right, he identified the academic terms he
gives to each zone.
The model is useful because it shows a heavily simplified version of reality that could
be applied to many cities. It doesn‟t actually explain why these zones are in those locations,
but it is the basis for theories that do: the main one is bid-rent, discussed elsewhere on this
site. Some other explanations that follow from the Burgess model are:
pf3
pf4

Partial preview of the text

Download Burgess and Hoyt's Urban Models: Concentric Zones and Sectors and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Business in PDF only on Docsity!

BURGESS’S CONCENTRIC ZONE MODEL

The Burgess Model was developed by Ernest Burgess in 1925. He identified a series of concentric rings coming out from the centre of the city which correspond to different types of land use. In the centre was the Central Business District; followed by an inner city area known as the transition zone, with light manufacturing; then a series of residential zones gradually becoming wealthier towards the edge of the city. Burgess‟s original model was entirely based on Chicago. The sloping line through the centre shows the shore of Lake Michigan. To the left of this line Burgess labelled the reality of Chicago with names and types of places; to the right, he identified the academic terms he gives to each zone. The model is useful because it shows a heavily simplified version of reality that could be applied to many cities. It doesn‟t actually explain why these zones are in those locations, but it is the basis for theories that do: the main one is bid-rent, discussed elsewhere on this site. Some other explanations that follow from the Burgess model are:

The Concentric Zone Model, also known as the Burgess Model. Source: Burgess, 1925.  The CBD is in the middle because it is the central location, and therefore easiest to get to. This encourages businesses to be located there because they can access the most customers.  Low class residential (the „zone of working-men‟s homes‟) is near the factory/transition zone because it is an undesirable location (polluted and congested), and because these people must walk or use public transport to get to work in the factories  People on low incomes cannot afford large houses, so these areas become densely populated; the population density on the outskirts is lower as the house size is larger  High class residential is around the outside because these people can afford the private transport to get to the city centre quickly and conveniently However, the model is also criticised for many reasons:  It is too specific to North American cities; it does not fit more historic cities or those that have recently grown  The model is over 90 years old and it does not fit the modern age and is “a product of its time” both in terms of the wording used on the model and the way that the model is organised  There are many assumptions in the model that mean it doesn‟t fit other cities very well HOYT’S SECTOR MODEL In 1939 Homer Hoyt published “The Structure and Growth of Residential Neighborhoods in American Cities” in which he developed Burgess‟s ideas further. Hoyt studied 142 cities in the United States. He recognised that they were more complex than simple rings of land use, and suggested that industrial land use is linked to transport routes. He also suggested that the location of transport and industry within the city affects the location of residential districts. This results in „sectors‟ of the city with different land uses. Components of Hoyt Model CBD – Central Business District is placed at the center. Sectors and the partial rings of land use/activities take place. This area is often known as downtown and has high rise

Middle-Class Residential This area has middle income groups who can afford more substantial travel cost and want better living conditions. The activities of people residing in this area consist of different activities and not just the industrial work. This area has the most significant residential area. High Class residential This is the outermost and farthest area from the downtown. Wealthy and affluent people live in this area. This area is clean, has less traffic, quiet and has large houses. Corridor or spine extending from CBD to the edge has the best housing. Limitations of Sector Model  It is a monocentric representation of cities; multiple business centers are not accounted for in this model.  Physical features – physical features may restrict or direct growth along specific wedges  No reference to out of town development Features of sector model  Presence of low-income groups near industries supports Hoyt Model  The Hoyt model realized that transportation (in particular) and access to resources caused a disruption of the Burgess model.  Account for major transportation routes and its effect on activities