
Minneapolis Confronts Its History of Housing Segregation - jseliger
https://slate.com/business/2018/12/minneapolis-single-family-zoning-housing-racism.html?via=homepage_recirc_engaged
======
paulsutter
San Francisco please pay attention

> abolish parking minimums for all new construction, and allow high-density
> buildings along transit corridors

~~~
xvedejas
We're trying! Here are two takeaways from this week:

"Minimum parking requirements on their way out in SF"
[http://www.sfexaminer.com/minimum-parking-requirements-
way-s...](http://www.sfexaminer.com/minimum-parking-requirements-way-sf/)

"The basic plan: upzoning near transit and jobs" [https://www.vox.com/policy-
and-politics/2018/12/7/18125644/s...](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-
politics/2018/12/7/18125644/scott-wiener-sb-50-california-housing)

------
flomo
As a native of Minneapolis, I support the gist of this policy.

But I also have knowledge of the zoning history of the city, and the narrative
in this story seems incredibly wrong. Minneapolis actually had "Manhattan"
zoning in many areas up until the late 1980s. There had been very little new
development in the prior 20 years, so the code became completely unrealistic.
Local community groups pushed for zoning reform to preserve the as-built
environment and communities.

Now those well-meaning progressive 1980s folks are being portrayed as
"segregationists", despite the fact of who they actually were. They were
trying to save their neighborhoods, but I guess every hero becomes a villain.

And, without even getting into it, Minneapolis was built up when the state was
97.5% white people. You could maybe find a class angle to this, but come on.

~~~
1001101
For most of the 20th century, parts of Minneapolis and surrounding areas had
racially restrictive deed covenants which prevented the sale or rental of
property to people of color. So, those neighborhoods they were trying to save
may have a legacy of structural racism.

Examples and interactive map here:
[https://www.mappingprejudice.org/](https://www.mappingprejudice.org/)

~~~
masonic
Such covenants were made unenforceable and rendered moot in 1948.

[http://www.bostonfairhousing.org/timeline/1948-Shelley-v-
Kra...](http://www.bostonfairhousing.org/timeline/1948-Shelley-v-Kramer.html)

------
bostonvaulter2
This seems very exciting. It will be fun to follow it's effects in the future.

------
Latteland
This issue came up in Seattle, where I read that they are also going to do
some rezoning making it possible to replace houses with small multi-family
dwellings. I'm sure it will be controversial in the same way there.

------
8bitsrule
An amazing and radical new direction for housing. Maybe now people will find
room to build tiny homes and cottages because they don't feel a need to wallow
in excess from (disappearing) box stores.

------
purplezooey
We need this in the Bay area suburbs... badly

------
droopybuns
I’d like some data that supports the claim that the zoning was racist by
design.

Minneapolis is a farming transit hub that expanded organically. I don’t
understand the underlying claims of racism here.

~~~
wisdomoftheages
There is a book, a mapping project, and a museum exhibit all linked in the
first couple paragraphs of TFA. I encourage you to look at them as a jumping-
off point into the 40 or 50 years of accumulated historical scholarship on the
subject.

------
zxcvvcxz
What's actually more racist, the single-family zoning, or the welfare
subsidies tearing apart minority families in the first place?

~~~
Phlarp
What is your proposed mechanism here?

~~~
all2
It looks like a 'what-about-ism'.

