Opening the Suburbs

By writing tough zoning ordinances, many of America's suburban towns and villages have curbed the construction of apartment buildings and required that each new house be built on a substantial plot of land. Zoning has thus had the effect -- often by intent -- of excluding low-and moderate-income families who cannot afford to buy or rent most available housing. It has also kept many towns lily-white.

That strategy will no longer work in one state. The New Jersey Supreme Court last week banned restrictive zoning throughout the state. The ruling resulted from a suit brought by the N.A.A.C.P., CORE and nine individuals against the town of Mount Laurel, N.J., a well-to-do suburb of Philadelphia. The plaintiffs had argued that the state constitution guarantees all citizens equal protection under law, but that some people, specifically Mount Laurel's 20,000 residents, were more protected than others. The opposition did not deny that the zoning was restrictive but insisted that remedy should come through legislation rather than the courts. In its decision, the court ruled that "every such municipality" must change its land-use regulations to make available "an appropriate variety of choice in housing."

Going even further, the court demanded that the towns devise land plans that will attract families of all social and economic levels. Though Mount Laurel will take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, most experts feel that the justices will not consider the case because it is based exclusively on New Jersey law. The precedent it sets, however, is likely to influence other suits against restrictive zoning in states across the land.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.