The Costs of Segregation

Segregationist land use policy is not only a moral issue, but also a social, economic, and environmental one. Our current system imposes tremendous costs on all of us.

Socioeconomic Consequences

Racially segregated areas have much larger income gaps by race. Racial minorities often inhabit neighborhoods without sufficient access to grocery stores, child care, and vital health services. These consequences reverberate across generations, as children who grow up in low-income, segregated neighborhoods make less money and pursue higher education at lower rates than those who grow up in integrated neighborhoods. Additionally, the limited range of housing in many Connecticut towns fails to attract and retain a racially diverse population of seniors, families, and young talent that businesses depend upon. Neighborhoods with a greater variety of housing types not only enjoy greater economic resilience, but also facilitate aging-in-place and decrease traffic congestion.

Environmental Consequences

Although land use policy aims to restructure our environment to protect human lives while meeting various needs, the development wrought so far has failed to ensure racial and socioeconomic equity.  Through the placement of industrial zones, local planning tends to locate hazardous waste sites and fracking sites near predominantly non-white communities. Such zoning, along with more lax regulations around these communities, results in much higher exposure to particulate matter and volatile organic compounds among people of color. Consequently, asthma rates are twice as high among black children than among white children.

Additionally, the urban heat island effect, which causes more fatalities than any other extreme weather event in the United States, is far more prevalent in minority neighborhoods. In fact, a recent study shows that neighborhoods that were redlined by the Home Owners' Loan Corporation were significantly warmer than non-redlined neighborhoods in 94% of surveyed cities, including New Britain, Stamford, East Hartford, and New Haven. Cities can start addressing these inequities by securing greater green investment in minority neighborhoods and implementing community-driven environmental standards for buildings and streets.

Land use policy has also caused the proliferation of sprawl and its detrimental environmental effects for communities across Connecticut. When lower density zones are combined with a limited variety of uses, as is common throughout the state, land use policy results in more vehicle miles traveled (VMT), which increases smog and greenhouse gas emissions. The effects of carbon emissions disproportionately affect low-income and minority communities. In 2017, Connecticut had higher VMT per capita than nine states, including New Jersey and California, despite being the fourth most densely populated, likely as a result of our low-density single-use zoning.