Courtney Morstad
10/22/13
Urban Geography 332U
Exercise #2
Urban Land Use: Residential Patterns and Change
Part 1: Charlotte, NC * Concentric Zones: Ernest Burgess, 1925 * Sector Model: Homer Hoyt, 1939 * Multiple nuclei-model: C. Harris & E. Ullman, 1945
Map 1. Population density is so low in the CBD of Charlotte, NC because it is mostly zoned retail, not residential. The tallest building in the core of Charlotte's CBD is the corporate headquarters of Nations Bank, surrounded by other businesses, therefore pushing out residential.
Generally, location rent is too high downtown for most of the population. Highways and intraurban expressways have enabled many households to move greater distances from their jobs. Suburban retail and service functions have been developed to accommodate the needs of suburbanizing populations.
Map 2. “Invasion” and “Succession” is described as the changing spatial patterns of residential areas. In Map 1 (1989) the outer ring had a low population density. In Map 2, the outer ring had a high population density. New home construction mainly took place in this outer ring creating an outward expansion. Different neighborhoods and communities were formed. As the city grows and the CBD expands, lower status residents move to adjacent neighborhoods, and more affluent residents move further from the CBD.

Map 4. There are two models to be identified here:
Concentric Zone Model – Areas of lowest median income are generally found closer to the CBD, higher income households have the highest density in the outer ring, and the middle groups are found in between.
Sector Model – There is a clearly identifiable wedge of high income households that stretches to the southeast.
It's common for low-income households to be found in close proximity to the major transportation routes that cities evolve around. Lower-income households also border the manufacturing/ warehousing sector (traffic, noise, and pollution make these less desirable locations to live).
Part 2: Boston, MA-NH
Map 1. Urban Land by Census Tract, 1970 to 2007
This map shows that most of the land central to Boston’s CBD was developed before 1970. Boston seems to have a far larger commercial core than Charlotte, NC.
The percentage change in urban land development after 1970 grew four times more than the percentage change in its population. This difference could be attributed to the area’s many colleges and universities making Boston an international center for education and medicine; many students populate the area for a temporary period of time. Another attribute to lower population could be cost of living.
The development starts from the city’s core, developing south and southwest from 1970 to 1990. From 1990 to 2007 the development is greater in the north and northwest. This suggests segregation, and is most similar to Hoyt’s Sector Model.
Map 2. Community Type by Municipality, 2000
I chose this map and the last map based off my observation and hypothesis of Map 1; surveying the Community Type by Municipality changes from 2000 to 2010.
In 2000, the Census Bureau reports Boston to be predominantly white. There is a ring around Boston’s CBD showing a highly diverse community. The outer ring (much larger than the middle) is a widespread, predominantly white community. This model most represents Burgess’s Concentric Zone Model.
Comparing to Charlotte, NC, the distribution of communities is more mixed and has more of a diverse population than Boston. (Boston 158 to 13; Charlotte 26 to 15)
Map 3. Community Type by Municipality, 2010
In 10 years, Boston has become slightly more diverse. Its second ring of diverse municipality has grown and sprawled out, mixing in with the predominantly white community. The Haverhill and Methuen areas that were predominantly white in 2000 are now diverse. An important observation is its location. A major transportation route is located in the middle of these areas, making it more desirable where land costs are lower. With lower status residents moving into the area, more affluent residents moved further away. This “invasion” and “succession” created the zone of transition. Essentially every other area that changed from predominantly white to diverse was an area found in close proximity to a major transportation route.
Comparing to Charlotte, NC, the region became increasingly diverse, creating a more dense mixed community than predominantly white, with the predominantly white community living the farthest from the CBD, and the mixed community in the middle; thus referring to Burgess’s Concentric Zone shift from Hoyt’s Sector Model. (Boston 145 to 25; Charlotte 17 to 24)

All maps are attached. In addition to what was required, there is also Community Type by Municipality Maps for Charlotte, NC from 2000 to 2010. This made it more reliable when comparing these two cities and their changes in urban patterns.