Changing Urban Land Use

Cities are not random collections of buildings — they have recognisable internal structures and patterns of land use. Geographers have developed models to describe and explain how different parts of a city are used for different purposes. Understanding these models and how land use patterns are changing is essential for the Edexcel B specification, because it provides the framework for analysing the challenges and opportunities of urbanisation. This lesson examines the classic models of urban structure and explores how cities are evolving in the 21st century.

---

The Burgess Model (1925)

The Burgess model (also called the concentric zone model) was developed by Ernest Burgess based on his study of Chicago in the 1920s. It proposes that a city grows outward from the centre in a series of concentric rings, each with a distinct land use.

The Five Zones

Zone	Name	Characteristics
1	CBD (Central Business District)	Heart of the city; shops, offices, entertainment; highest land values; most accessible location; tall buildings; few permanent residents
2	Inner City / Transition Zone	Oldest housing (often Victorian terraces); mixed land use; industry and housing side by side; poorer-quality housing; often undergoing change (gentrification or decay)
3	Inner Suburbs	Older, established residential areas; semi-detached and terraced housing; better quality than Zone 2; working-class and lower-middle-class residents
4	Outer Suburbs	Newer housing estates; detached and semi-detached houses with gardens; family-oriented; middle-class residents; lower density
5	Rural-Urban Fringe	Edge of the city meeting the countryside; mix of land uses (retail parks, business parks, golf courses); commuter villages; new housing developments

graph TD
    subgraph "Burgess Concentric Zone Model"
        A["Zone 1: CBD<br/>Shops, offices, highest land values"] --> B["Zone 2: Inner City<br/>Old housing, industry, transition"]
        B --> C["Zone 3: Inner Suburbs<br/>Terraced/semi-detached housing"]
        C --> D["Zone 4: Outer Suburbs<br/>Newer estates, gardens, families"]
        D --> E["Zone 5: Rural-Urban Fringe<br/>Retail parks, commuter villages"]
    end

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Burgess Model

Strengths	Weaknesses
Simple and easy to understand	Based on one American city (Chicago) — may not apply globally
Recognises that land use changes with distance from centre	Assumes city grows equally in all directions (ignores physical barriers like rivers, hills)
Correctly identifies the CBD as the most accessible, highest-value location	Does not account for transport routes that distort the pattern
Still broadly recognisable in many UK cities	Developed in the 1920s — cities have changed enormously since then

---

The Hoyt Model (1939)

Homer Hoyt developed his sector model in 1939 as an improvement on the Burgess model. Instead of concentric rings, Hoyt proposed that land use develops in sectors (wedge-shapes) radiating outwards from the CBD, following transport routes.

Key Features of the Hoyt Model

Feature	Explanation
Sectors follow transport routes	Industry develops along railways, canals and main roads; housing develops along cleaner, more desirable routes
Similar land uses cluster	Once a sector is established (e.g., industrial), it tends to continue in the same direction as the city grows
High-class housing	Located in the most desirable sectors — often on higher ground, away from industry, with good views
Low-class housing	Near industrial areas, along railway lines, in less desirable locations

Why Do Sectors Form?

1. Industry needs flat land, access to transport (rail, road, canal) and space for expansion. Once established near a transport route, industrial land use extends outward along that route.
2. Wealthy residents choose to live away from industrial pollution and noise, often on higher ground or in areas with attractive views and green space.
3. Lower-income housing develops near workplaces (factories), so working-class housing sectors form alongside industrial sectors.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Hoyt Model

Strengths	Weaknesses
Accounts for the influence of transport routes on land use	Still based primarily on Western cities
More realistic than Burgess — recognises sectors rather than perfect rings	Does not account for multiple nuclei or out-of-town developments
Explains why some areas of a city are wealthier than others	Less applicable to cities in LICs and NEEs with informal settlements
Industrial corridors along transport routes are visible in many cities	Assumes wealthy residents always choose the same sector

Exam Tip: In the exam, you may be asked to compare the Burgess and Hoyt models. The key difference is that Burgess uses concentric zones (rings from the centre) while Hoyt uses sectors (wedges along transport routes). Both models place the CBD at the centre and recognise that land use changes with distance from the centre.

---

The CBD in Detail