THE ZONING GAME: MUNICIPAL PRACTICES AND POLICIES.

By Richard F. Babcock '40. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press, 1966. 202 pp.$5.00.

The Zoning Game is a lively, courageous, and controversial book which represents one of the most thoughtful contributions to our planning literature to appear in recent years.

This study, which focuses on suburban zoning practices, has many virtues. Not the least of these is the fact that the author pulls no punches in challenging the hypocrisy and subterfuge which is too often passed off under the guise of "proper" zoning techniques. Mr. Babcock, a Chicago lawyer who serves as a member of the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, bases his challenge on three central themes:

First, zoning should not be regarded as an inflexible end in itself, but rather as a part of the process of government. As such, it should serve as a means towards the realization of the larger ends of society. Zoning becomes susceptible to abuse when it "tries to dignify its techniques, objectives, devices and goals with more pretentious labels." It is too often used to subvert the larger needs of society, rather than serving as a creative instrument of society that is administered in an impartial, fair, and neutral manner.

Hence, the second basic theme. Although zoning practices may often be sanctified in a halo of Property Value and Planning Theory justifications, they just as often serve as the legal camouflage that permits us "to wrap our selfish anti-democratic aims in a garment of public interest."

Finally, these narrow purposes can infect the individual community as well as the individual home owner. The battles over zoning are not always between the home owner versus his municipality, but also between the individual suburban community versus its larger regional environment.

While all three of these themes are relevant to the current woes of our modern urban society, the latter one is especially important to the contemporary metropolitan dilemma. As Mr. Babcock points out, "in many instances the preeminence of the municipality is appropriate and is not inconsistent with the interests of the larger community." Yet, he goes on to sharpen his scalpel by observing that many of the very same suburban municipalities that are only too anxious to abdicate their local fiscal responsibilities to State and Federal authorities will fight to the death against any interference with restrictive zoning ordinances which are designed to protect their borders against high-density infiltration by outsiders. To combat this kind of parochialism, Babcock calls for a number of reforms including the "creation of a state-wide administrative agency to review decisions of local authorities in land-use matters, with final appeal by an appellate court."

It would be misleading to imply that this book represents a diatribe against zoning, or against the legitimate interests of the various actors who play the zoning game. As Babcock makes clear, there are many legitimate interests here. The landowner should expect equal treatment and reasonable usability of his land; the neighbor should receive protection against common law nuisances and the hazards of fire, contagion, and the like; the municipality may have a valid interest in basic public services and the vitality of its central shopping area, as well as in preserving its unique physical character. Yet, the neighboring community also has its own valid interests and it should not be totally excluded from the local zoning process.

Thus, Mr. Babcock's quarrel is not with zoning per se, but rather with the misuse and mal-administration of zoning powers. He has written a powerful and penetrating book. All of us would do well to study his observations, and then evaluate how the particular game Mr. Babcock describes is being played in our own local communities.

Associate Professor of Government