document_title: Zoning in the United States

question_text: name the one major city in texas that has no zoning ordinances

question_tokens: name the one major city in texas that has no zoning ordinances

text: Zoning in the United States

text: Origins and history[edit]

text: Zoning, narrowly construed, refers to the designation of discrete land uses to well-defined areas of the city. More broadly construed, zoning refers to a wide range of local regulations enabled by police powers delegated from the states. In the beginning, zoning ordinances in the United States were more narrow in scope, and later ordinances were more comprehensive.

text: 1908 Los Angeles zoning ordinances[edit]

text: Los Angeles City Council passed the first municipal zoning ordinance in the United States on September 24, 1908. Though the ordinance did not assign all parts of the city to a zoning map, as with later American ordinances, it did establish both residential and industrial districts. Existing nuisance laws had already prohibited some industrial land uses in Los Angeles. Dangerous businesses, such as warehousing explosives was illegal before 1908, as were odorous land uses, such as slaughterhouses and tanneries. The ordinance created three large residential districts with identical laws, and they all prohibited business such as laundries, lumber yards, and in general, any industry using equipment driven by motors. The law could cause businesses to relocate retroactively, and did not require compensation. The prohibition against laundries had a racial component since many were owned by Chinese residents and citizens. The California Supreme Court had already upheld such rules in Yick Wo (1886). Many later California court cases supported the 1908 ordinance, even in one case of ex post facto relocation of an existing brickyard.[1]

text: The same 1908 ordinance established eight industrial districts. These were drawn mainly in areas which had already hosted significant industrial development, within corridors along the freight railroads and the Los Angeles River. However, between 1909 and 1915, Los Angeles City Council responded to some requests by business interests to create exceptions to industrial bans within the three 1908 Residential Districts. They did this through the legal device of districts within districts. While some might have been benign, such as motion picture districts, some others were polluting, such as poultry slaughterhouse districts. Despite the expanding list of exceptions, new ordinances in other cities (i.e., 1914 Oakland ordinance) followed the 1908 Los Angeles model through about 1917.[1] There existed 22 cities with zoning ordinances by 1913.[2]

text: Race-based zoning ordinances, 1910–1917[edit]

text: Many American cities passed residential segregation laws based on race between 1910 and 1917. Baltimore City Council passed such a law in December 1910.[3][4] Unlike the Los Angeles Residential District which created well-defined areas for residential land use, the Baltimore scheme was implemented on a block-by-block basis. Druid Hill had already existed as a de facto all-black neighborhood, but some whites in nearby neighborhoods protested for formal segregation. Just a few months later, Richmond, Virginia passed its race-based zoning law, though it was struck down by the Virginia Supreme Court. Over the next few years, several southern cities established race-based residential zoning ordinances, including four other cities in Virginia, one in North Carolina, and another in South Carolina. Atlanta passed a law similar to 1910 Baltimore ordinance. Before 1918, race-based zoning ordinances were adopted in New Orleans, Louisville, St. Louis, and Oklahoma City.[4]

text: In the end, the United States Supreme Court struck down the Louisville ordinance, ruling in Buchanan v. Warley that race-based zoning was a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment;[3][4] more specifically, the Court held that the law violated the "right to contract" and the right to alienate property.[5] Despite the Buchanan ruling, the city of Atlanta devised a new race-based zoning ordinance, arguing that the Supreme Court had merely applied to specific defects of the Louisville ordinance. Even after the Georgia Supreme Court struck down the Atlanta ordinance, the city continued to use their racially based residential zoning maps. Other municipalities tested the limits of Buchanan. In Florida, Apopka and West Palm Beach drafted residential zoning ordinances. Birmingham, Indianapolis, and New Orleans all passed racially based zoning laws, while Atlanta, Austin, Kansas City, Missouri, and Norfolk considered race in their "spot zoning" decisions. In some cases, these practices continued for decades after Buchanan.[5]

text: 1916 New York Zoning Resolution[edit]

text: In 1916, New York City adopted the first zoning regulations to apply citywide as a reaction to construction of the Equitable Building (which still stands at 120 Broadway). The building towered over the neighboring residences, completely covering all available land area within the property boundary, blocking windows of neighboring buildings and diminishing the availability of sunshine for the people in the affected area.[6]

text: Bassett's zoning map established height restrictions for the entire city, expressed as ratios between maximum building height and the width of adjacent streets. Residential zones were the most restrictive, limiting building height to no higher than the width of adjoining streets. The law also regulated land use, preventing factories and warehousing from encroaching on retail districts.[7]

text: These laws, written by a commission headed by Edward Bassett and signed by Mayor John Purroy Mitchel, became the blueprint for zoning in the rest of the country, partly because Bassett headed the group of planning lawyers who wrote The Standard State Zoning Enabling Act that was issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce in 1924 and accepted almost without change by most states. The effect of these zoning regulations on the shape of skyscrapers was illustrated famously by architect and illustrator Hugh Ferriss.[8]

text: Standard State Zoning Enabling Act[edit]

text: The State Standard Zoning Enabling Act (SZEA) is a federal planning document drafted and published through the United States Commerce Department in 1924, which gave states a model under which they could enact their own zoning enabling laws. The genesis for this act is the initiative of Herbert Hoover while he was Secretary of Commerce. Deriving from a general policy to increase home ownership in the United States, Secretary Hoover established the Advisory Committee on Zoning, which was assigned the task of drafting model zoning statutes. This committee was later known as the Advisory Committee on City Planning and Zoning. Among the members of this committee were Edward Bassett, Alfred Bettman, Morris Knowles, Nelson Lewis, Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., and Lawrence Veiller.[9]

text: The Advisory Committee on Zoning appointed a subcommittee under the title of "Laws and Ordinances." This committee—which included Bassett, Knowles, Lewis, and Veiller—composed a series of drafts for SZEA, with one dated as early as December 15, 1921. A second draft came forth from the subcommittee in January 1922. Several drafts culminated in the first published document in 1924, which was revised and republished in 1926.[9]

text: New York City went on to develop more complex zoning regulations encompassing floor-area ratio regulations, air rights, and others according to the density-specific needs of the neighborhoods.[citation needed]

text: Euclid v. Ambler Realty[edit]

text: The constitutionality of zoning ordinances was upheld in 1926. The zoning ordinance of Euclid, Ohio was challenged in court by a local land owner on the basis that restricting use of property violated the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Ambler Realty Company filed suit on November 13, 1922 against the Village of Euclid, Ohio, alleging that the local zoning ordinances effectively diminished its property values. The village had zoned an area of land held by Ambler Realty as a residential neighborhood. Ambler argued that it would lose money because if the land could be leased to industrial users it would have netted a great deal more money than as a residential area.  Ambler Realty claimed these breaches implied an unconstitutional taking of property and denied equal protection under the law.[10]

text: Although initially ruled unconstitutional by lower courts, ultimately the zoning ordinance was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Village of Euclid, Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co..

text: In doing so, the court accepted the arguments of zoning defenders that it met two essential needs. First, zoning extended and improved on nuisance law in that it provided advance notice that certain types of uses were incompatible with other uses in a particular district. The second argument was that zoning was a necessary municipal-planning instrument.

text: The Euclid case was a facial challenge, meaning that the entire scheme of regulation was argued to be unconstitutional under any set of circumstances. The United States Supreme Court justified the ordinance saying that a community may enact reasonable laws to keep the pig out of the parlor, even if pigs may not be prohibited from the entire community.

text: Since the Euclid case, there have been no more facial challenges to the general scheme. By the late 1920s most of the nation had developed a set of zoning regulations.[citation needed]

text: Houston, 1924–1929[edit]

text: Houston remains an exception within the United States because it never adopted a zoning ordinance. However, strong support existed for zoning in Houston among elements within municipal government and among the city's elites during the 1920s. In 1924, Mayor Oscar Holcombe, appointed the first funded City Planning Commission. City Council voted in favor of hiring S. Herbert Hare of Hare and Hare as a planning consultant. Following the passage of a state zoning enabling statute in 1927, Holcombe appointed Will Hogg to chair a new City Planning Commission.[2] Will Hogg was a co-founder of the River Oaks development, the son of a former Texas Governor and an heir to family oil wealth.[11] By 1929, both Hare and Hogg abandoned efforts to push the zoning ordinance to a referendum. In their estimation, there was not enough support for it. Hogg resigned as chair of the City Planning Commission that year. In 1930, Hogg died while vacationing in Germany.[2]

text: Among large populated cities in the United States, Houston is unique as the largest city in the country with no zoning ordinances. Houston voters have rejected efforts to implement zoning in 1948, 1962, and 1993. It is commonly believed that "Houston is Houston"[ambiguous] because of the lack of zoning laws.[12] Houston is similar, however, to other large cities throughout the Sun Belt, who all experienced the bulk of their population growth during the Age of the Automobile. The largest of these cities, such as Los Angeles, Atlanta, Miami, Tampa, Dallas, Phoenix, and Kansas City, have all expanded their metropolitan footprints along with Houston while having land use zoning.[13][14][15]

text: While Houston has no official zoning ordinances, many private properties have legal covenants or "deed restrictions" that limit the future uses of land, with effects similar to those of zoning systems.[14][16]

text: Also, the city has enacted development regulations that specify how lots are subdivided, standard setbacks, and parking requirements.[17] The regulations have contributed to the city's automobile-dependent sprawl, by requiring the existence of large minimum residential lot sizes and large commercial parking lots.[18]

text: Without land use-based zoning, many neighborhoods in the inner-ring outskirts, such as Montrose, feature small businesses such as bars, restaurants, mechanics, and hardware stores that are mixed in among residential streets.

text: Scope[edit]

text: Theoretically, the primary purpose of zoning is to segregate uses that are thought to be incompatible. In practice, however, zoning is used as a permitting system to prevent new development from harming existing residents or businesses. Zoning is commonly exercised by local governments such as counties or municipalities, although the state determines the nature of the zoning scheme with a zoning enabling law. Federal lands are not subject to state planning controls.

text: Zoning may include regulation of the kinds of activities that will be acceptable on particular lots (such as open space, residential, agricultural, commercial, or industrial), the densities at which those activities may be performed (from low-density housing such as single family homes to high-density such as high-rise apartment buildings), the height of buildings, the amount of space structures may occupy, the location of a building on the lot (setbacks), the proportions of the types of space on a lot (for example, how much landscaped space and how much paved space), and how much parking must be provided. Some commercial zones specify what types of products may be sold by particular stores.[19] The details of how individual planning systems incorporate zoning into their regulatory regimes varies although the intention is always similar.

text: Most zoning systems have a procedure for granting variances (exceptions to the zoning rules), usually because of some perceived hardship due to the particular nature of the property in question. If the variance is not warranted, then it may cause an allegation of spot zoning to arise. Most state zoning-enabling laws prohibit local zoning authorities from engaging in any spot zoning because it would undermine the purpose of a zoning scheme.[20]

text: Zoning codes vary by jurisdiction. As one example, residential zones might be coded as R1 for single-family homes, R2 for two-family homes, and R3 for multiple-family homes. As another example, R60 might represent a minimum lot of 60,000 sq. ft. (1.4 acre or about 0.5 hectares) per single family home, while R30 might require lots of only half that size.

text: Mature zoning practices[edit]

text: Legal challenges[edit]

text: There are several limitations to the ability of local governments in asserting police powers to control land use. First, constitutional constraints include freedom of speech (First Amendment), unjust takings of property (Fifth Amendment), and equal protection (Fourteenth Amendment). There are also federal statutes that sometimes constrain local zoning. These include the Federal Housing Amendments Act of 1988, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000.[21]

text: Freedom of Speech[edit]

text: Local governments regulate signage on private property through zoning ordinances. Sometimes courts invalidate laws which regulate the content of speech rather than the manners and modes of speech. One court invalidated a local ordinance that prohibited "for sale" and "sold" signs on private property. Another court struck down a law which prohibited signs for adult cabarets.[21]

text: Takings after 1987[edit]

text: This section  possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (May 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

tag: table

text: Beginning in 1987, several United States Supreme Court cases ruled against land use regulations as being a taking requiring just compensation pursuant to the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Los Angeles County ruled that even a temporary taking may require compensation.  Nollan v. California Coastal Commission ruled that construction permit (short: permit) conditions that fail to substantially advance the agency's authorized purposes, require compensation. Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council ruled that numerous environmental concerns were not sufficient to deny all development without compensation. Dolan v. City of Tigard ruled that conditions of a permit must be roughly proportional to the impacts of the proposed new development. Palazzolo v. Rhode Island ruled property rights are not diminished by unconstitutional laws that exist without challenge at the time the complaining property owner acquired title.

text: The landowner victories have been limited mostly to the U.S. Supreme Court, however, despite that Court's purported overriding authority.[weasel words][citation needed] Each decision in favor of the landowner is based on the facts of the particular case, so that regulatory takings rulings in favor of landowners are little more than a landowners' mirage.[weasel words][citation needed] Even the trend of the U.S. Supreme Court[citation needed] with the 2002 ruling in Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who had previously[specify] ruled with a 5-4 majority in favor of the landowner, switched sides[specify] to favor the government that had delayed development for more than 20 years because of the government's own indecision about alleged concerns about the water quality of Lake Tahoe.

text: Equal protection[edit]

text: Specific zoning laws have been overturned in some other U.S. cases where the laws were not applied evenly (violating equal protection) or were considered to violate free speech. In the Atlanta suburb of Roswell, Georgia, an ordinance banning billboards was overturned in court on such grounds. It has been deemed that a municipality's sign ordinance must be content neutral with regard to the regulation of signs. The city of Roswell, Georgia now has instituted a sign ordinance that regulates signs, based strictly on dimensional and aesthetic codes rather than an interpretation of the sign content (i.e. use of colors, lettering, etc.).

text: Religious exercise[edit]

text: On other occasions, religious institutions sought to circumvent zoning laws, citing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA). The Supreme Court eventually overturned RFRA in just such a case, City of Boerne v. Flores 521 U.S. 507 (1997). Congress enacted the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) in 2000, however, in an effort to correct the constitutionally objectionable problems of the RFRA.[22]

text: In the 2005 case of Cutter v. Wilkinson, the United States Supreme Court held RLUIPA to be constitutional as applied to institutionalized persons, but has not yet decided RLUIPA's constitutionality as it relates to religious land uses.

text: Types[edit]

text: Zoning codes have evolved over the years as urban planning theory has changed, legal constraints have fluctuated, and political priorities have shifted.[23] The various approaches to zoning may be divided into four broad categories: Euclidean, Performance, Incentive, and Form-based.

text: Euclidean[edit]

text: Conventional[edit]

text: Named for the type of zoning code adopted in the town of Euclid, Ohio, Euclidean zoning codes are by far the most prevalent in the United States,[citation needed] being used extensively in small towns and large cities alike.

text: Standard Euclidean[edit]

text: Also known as "Building Block" zoning, Euclidean zoning is characterized by the segregation of land uses into specified geographic districts and dimensional standards stipulating limitations on the magnitude of development activity that is allowed to take place on lots within each type of district. Typical types of land-use districts in Euclidean zoning are: residential (single-family), residential (multi-family), commercial, and industrial. Uses within each district are usually heavily prescribed to exclude other types of uses (residential districts typically disallow commercial or industrial uses). Some "accessory" or "conditional" uses may be allowed in order to accommodate the needs of the primary uses. Dimensional standards apply to any structures built on lots within each zoning district, and typically, take the form of setbacks, height limits, minimum lot sizes, lot coverage limits, and other limitations on the building envelope.

text: Euclidean zoning is preferred by many municipalities,[citation needed] due to its relative effectiveness, ease of implementation (one set of explicit, prescriptive rules), long-established legal precedent, and familiarity to planners and design professionals. Euclidean zoning has received heavy criticism, however, for its lack of flexibility and institutionalization of now-outdated planning theory. Separation of uses contributes to wasteful sprawl development, loss of open space, heavy infrastructure costs, and reliance on the automobile.

text: Euclidean II[edit]

text: Euclidean II Zoning uses traditional Euclidean zoning classifications (industrial, commercial, multi-family, residential, etc.), but places them in a hierarchical order "nesting" one zoning class within another similar to the concept of Planned Unit Developments (PUD) mixed uses, but now for all zoning districts.[citation needed]

text: For example, multi-family is not only permitted in "higher order" multi-family zoning districts, but also permitted in high order commercial and industrial zoning districts as well. Protection of land values is maintained by stratifying the zoning districts into levels according to their location in the urban society (neighborhood, community, municipality, and region). Euclidean II zoning also incorporates transportation and utilities as new zoning districts in its matrix dividing zoning into three categories: public, semi-public and private. In addition, all Euclidean II Zoning permitted activities and definitions are tied directly to the state's building code, Municode, and the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) assuring statewide uniformity. Euclidean II zoning fosters the concepts of mixed use, new urbanism and "highest and best use" and, simplifies all zoning classifications into a single and uniform set of activities. It is relatively easy to make a transition from most existing zoning classification systems to the Euclidean II Zoning system.[citation needed]

text: Smart zoning[edit]

text: Smart zoning (or smart coding) is an alternative to Euclidean zoning. There are a number of different techniques to accomplish smart zoning. Floating zones, cluster zoning, and planned unit development (PUDs) are possible even as the conventional Euclidean code exists, or the conventional code may be completely replaced by a smart code, as the city of Miami is proposing. The following three techniques may be used to accomplish either conventional separation of uses or more environmentally responsible, traditional neighborhood development, depending on how the codes are written.

text: For serious reform of Euclidean zoning, traditional neighborhood development ordinances such as form-based codes or the SmartCode are usually necessary.

text: Floating zones involve an ordinance that describes a zone's characteristics and requirements for its establishment, but its location remains without a designation until the board finds that a situation exists that allows the implementation of that type of zone in a particular area.  When the criteria of a floating zone is met the floating zone ceases "to float" and is adopted by a zoning amendment. Some states allow this type of zoning, such as New York and Maryland, while states such as Pennsylvania do not, as an instance of spot zoning.[20] To be upheld, the floating zone the master plan must permit floating zones or at least they should not conflict with the master plan. Further, the criteria and standards provided for them should be adequate and the action taken should not be arbitrary or unreasonable. Generally, the floating zone is more easily adoptable and immune from legal challenges if it does not differ substantially from zoned area in which it is implemented.

text: Cluster zoning permits residential uses to be clustered more closely together than normally allowed, thereby leaving substantial land area to be devoted to open space.

text: Planned unit development is cluster zoning, but allows for mixed uses. They include some commercial and light industrial uses in order to blend together a traditional downtown environment, but at a suburban scale. Some have argued, however, that such a planned unit development may be a sham for the purpose of bringing in commercial and industrial uses forbidden by the state's zoning law;[citation needed] some courts have held such a "sham" to be an "arbitrary and capricious abuse" of the police power.[citation needed]

text: Performance[edit]

text: Also known as "effects-based planning", performance zoning uses performance-based or goal-oriented criteria to establish review parameters for proposed development projects in any area of a municipality. Performance zoning often utilizes a "points-based" system whereby a property developer may apply credits toward meeting established zoning goals through selecting from a 'menu' of compliance options (some examples include: mitigation of environmental impacts, providing public amenities, building affordable housing units, etc.). Additional discretionary criteria may be established also as part of the review process.

text: The appeal of performance zoning lies in its high level of flexibility, rationality, transparency, and accountability.[24] Performance zoning avoids the arbitrary nature of the Euclidean approach, and better accommodates market principles and private property rights with environmental protection, however, performance zoning can be extremely difficult to implement and can require a high level of discretionary activity on the part of the supervising authority. For this reason performance zoning has not been adopted widely in the USA, and is usually limited to specific categories within a broader prescriptive code when found.

text: New Zealand's planning system, however, is grounded in effects-based performance zoning under the Resource Management Act 1991.

text: Incentive[edit]

text: First implemented in Chicago and New York City, incentive zoning is intended to provide a reward-based system to encourage development that meets established urban development goals.[25] Typically, a base level of prescriptive limitations on development will be established and an extensive list of incentive criteria will be established for developers to adopt or not, at their discretion. A reward scale connected to the incentive criteria provides an enticement for developers to incorporate the desired development criteria into their projects. Common examples include (floor-area-ratio) bonuses for affordable housing provided on-site and height limit bonuses for the inclusion of public amenities on-site. Incentive zoning has become more common throughout the United States during the last 20 years.

text: Incentive zoning allows for a high degree of flexibility, but may be complex to administer. The more a proposed development takes advantage of incentive criteria, the more closely it has to be reviewed on a discretionary basis. The initial creation of the incentive structure in order to best serve planning priorities also may be challenging and often, requires extensive ongoing revision to maintain balance between incentive magnitude and value given to developers.

text: Form-based[edit]

text: Form-based zoning relies on rules applied to development sites according to both prescriptive and potentially discretionary criteria. Typically, these criteria are dependent on lot size, location, proximity, and other various site- and use-specific characteristics. For example, in a largely suburban single family residential area, uses such as offices, retail, or even light industrial could be permitted so long as they conformed (setback, building size, lot coverage, height, and other factors) with other existing development in the area.

text: Form based codes offer considerably more flexibility in building uses than do Euclidean codes, but, as they are comparatively new, may be more challenging to create. Form-based codes have not yet been widely adopted in the United States. When form-based codes do not contain appropriate illustrations and diagrams, they have been criticized as being difficult to interpret.

text: One example of a recently adopted code with form-based design features is the Land Development Code[26] adopted by Louisville, Kentucky in 2003. This zoning code creates "form districts" for Louisville Metro. Each form district intends to recognize that some areas of the city are more suburban in nature, while others are more urban. Building setbacks, heights, and design features vary according to the form district. As an example, in a "traditional neighborhood" form district, a maximum setback might be 15 feet (4.6 m) from the property line, while in a suburban "neighborhood" there may be no maximum setback.

text: Dallas, Texas, is currently developing an optional form-based zoning ordinance.[27] Since the concept of form-based codes is relatively new, this type of zoning may be more challenging to enact.

text: One version of form-based or "form integrated" zoning uses a base district overlay method or "composite" zoning. This method is based on a Euclidean framework and includes three district components - a use component, a site component, and an architectural component.

text: The use component is similar in nature to the use districts of Euclidean zoning. With an emphasis on form standards, however, use components are typically more inclusive and broader in scope. The site components define a variety of site conditions from low intensity to high intensity such as size and scale of buildings and parking, accessory structures, drive-through commercial lanes, landscaping, outdoor storage and display, vehicle fueling and washing, overhead commercial service doors, etc. The architectural components address architectural elements and materials.

text: This zoning method is more flexible and contextually adaptable than standard Euclidean zoning while being easier to interpret than other form-based codes.

text: Amendments to zoning regulations[edit]

text: Amendments to zoning regulations may be subject to judicial review, should such amendments be challenged as ultra vires or unconstitutional.

text: The standard applied to the amendment to determine whether it may survive judicial scrutiny is the same as the review of a zoning ordinance: whether the restriction is arbitrary or whether it bears a reasonable relationship to the exercise of the police power of the state.

text: If the residents in the targeted neighborhood complain about the amendment, their argument in court does not allow them any vested right to keep the zoned district the same,[28] however, they do not have to prove the difficult standard that the amendment amounts to a taking.[28] If the gain to the public for the rezoning is small compared to the hardships that would affect the residents, then the amendment may be granted if it provides relief to the residents.[28]

text: If the local zoning authority passes the zoning amendment, then spot zoning allegations may arise, should the rezoning be preferential in nature and not reasonably justified.

text: Limitations and criticisms[edit]

text: Land-use zoning is a tool in the treatment of certain social ills, and part of the larger concept of social engineering[citation needed]. There is criticism of zoning, however, particularly amongst proponents of limited government or Laissez-faire political perspectives.

text: Circumventions[edit]

text: Generally, existing development in a community is not affected by the new zoning laws because it is "grandfathered" or legally non-conforming as a nonconforming use, meaning the prior development is exempt from compliance. Consequently, zoning may only affect new development in a growing community. In addition, if undeveloped land is zoned to allow development, that land becomes relatively expensive, causing developers to seek land that is not zoned for development with the intention to seek rezoning of that land. Communities generally react by not zoning undeveloped land to allow development until a developer requests rezoning and presents a suitable plan. Development under this practice appears to be piecemeal and uncoordinated. Communities try to influence the timing of development by government expenditures for new streets, sewers, and utilities usually desired for modern developments. Contrary to federal recommendations discouraging it, the development of interstate freeways for purposes unrelated to planned community growth, creates an inexorable rush to develop the relatively cheap land near interchanges. Property tax suppression measures such as California Proposition 13 have led many communities desperate to capture sales tax revenue to disregard their comprehensive plans and rezone undeveloped land for retail establishments.

text: In Colorado, local governments are free to choose not to enforce their own zoning and other land regulation laws. This is called selective enforcement. Steamboat Springs, Colorado is an example of a location with illegal buildings and lax enforcement.[29][30]

text: Social[edit]

text: In more recent times, zoning has been criticized by urban planners and scholars (most notably Jane Jacobs) as a source of new social ills, including urban sprawl, the separation of homes from employment, and the rise of "car culture."  Some communities have begun to encourage development of denser, homogenized, mixed-use neighborhoods that promote walking and cycling to jobs and shopping. Nonetheless, a single-family home and car are major parts of the "American Dream" for nuclear families, and zoning laws often reflect this: in some cities, houses that do not have an attached garage are deemed "blighted" and are subject to redevelopment. Movements that disapprove of zoning, such as New Urbanism and Smart Growth, generally try to reconcile these competing demands. New Urbanists in particular try through creative urban design solutions that hark back to 1920s and 1930s practices. Late in the twentieth century, New Urbanists have also come under attack for encouraging sprawl and for the highly prescriptive nature of their model code proposals.

text: Exclusionary[edit]

text: Zoning has long been criticized as a tool of racial and socio-economic exclusion and segregation, primarily through minimum lot-size requirements and land-use segregation (sometimes referred to as "environmental racism"). Early zoning codes often were explicitly racist. June Manning Thomas provides a survey of the literature concerned with this particular critique of zoning.[31]

text: Exclusionary practices remain common among suburbs wishing to keep out those deemed socioeconomically or ethnically undesirable: for example, representatives of the city of Barrington Hills, Illinois once told editors of the Real Estate section of the Chicago Tribune that the city's 5-acre (20,000 m2) minimum lot size helped to "keep out the riff-raff."

text: Racial[edit]

text: Since 1910 in Baltimore,[32] numerous U.S. States created racial zoning laws (redlining); however such laws were ruled out in 1917 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that such laws interfered with the property rights of owners (Buchanan v. Warley).[33] There were repeated attempts by various states, municipalities, and individuals since then to create zoning and housing laws based on race, however, such laws eventually were overturned by the courts. The legality of all discrimination in housing, by public or private entities, was ended by the Fair Housing Act (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968).[34]

text: Despite such rulings, many claim that zoning laws are still used for the purpose of racial segregation.[35]

text: Housing affordability[edit]

text: Zoning also has been implicated as a primary driving factor in the rapidly accelerating lack of affordable housing in urban areas.[36] One mechanism for this is zoning by many suburban and exurban communities for very large minimum residential lot and building sizes in order to preserve home values by excluding poorer people. This shifts the market toward more expensive homes than ordinarily might be built. According to the Manhattan Institute, as much as half of the price paid for housing in some jurisdictions is directly attributable to the hidden costs of restrictive zoning regulation.

text: For example, the entire town of Los Altos Hills, California (with the exception of the local community college and a religious convent), is zoned for residential use with a minimum lot size of one acre (4,000 m²) and a limit to only one primary dwelling per lot. All these restrictions were upheld as constitutional by federal and state courts in the early 1970s.[37][38] The town traditionally attempted to comply with state affordable housing requirements by counting secondary dwellings (that is, apartments over garages and guest houses) as affordable housing, and since 1989 also has allowed residents to build so-called "granny units".[39]

text: In 1969 Massachusetts enacted the Massachusetts Comprehensive Permit Act: Chapter 40B, originally referred to as the anti-snob zoning law. Under this statute, in municipalities with less than 10% affordable housing, a developer of affordable housing may seek waiver of local zoning and other requirements from the local zoning board of appeals, with review available from the state Housing Appeals Committee[40] if the waiver is denied. Similar laws are in place in other parts of the United States (e.g., Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Illinois), although their effectiveness is disputed.


document_title: The Sound of Music (film)

question_text: where in austria was the sound of music filmed

root

text: The Sound of Music (film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: Maria is a free-spirited young Austrian woman studying to become a nun at Nonnberg Abbey in Salzburg in 1938. Her love of music and the mountains, her youthful enthusiasm and imagination, and her lack of discipline cause some concern among the nuns. The Mother Abbess, believing Maria would be happier outside the abbey, sends her to the villa of retired naval officer Captain Georg von Trapp to be governess to his seven children—Liesl, Friedrich, Louisa, Kurt, Brigitta, Marta, and Gretl. The Captain has been raising his children alone using strict military discipline following the death of his first wife. Although the children misbehave at first, Maria responds with kindness and patience, and soon the children come to trust and respect her. Liesl, the oldest, is won over after Maria protects her from discovery when she is nearly caught sneaking back into the house after meeting Rolf, a delivery boy she is in love with.

tag: p

text: While the Captain is away in Vienna, Maria makes play clothes for the children and takes them around Salzburg and the surrounding mountains, and she teaches them how to sing. When the Captain returns to the villa with Baroness Elsa Schraeder, a wealthy socialite, and their mutual friend, Max Detweiler, they are greeted by Maria and the children returning from a boat ride on the lake that concludes when their boat overturns. Displeased by his children's clothes and activities, and Maria's impassioned appeal that he get closer to his children, the Captain orders her to return to the abbey. Just then he hears singing coming from inside the house and is astonished to see his children singing for the Baroness. Filled with emotion, the Captain joins his children, singing for the first time in years. Afterwards, he apologizes to Maria and asks her to stay.

text: Impressed by the children's singing, Max proposes he enter them in the upcoming Salzburg Festival but the suggestion is immediately rejected by the Captain as he does not allow his children to sing in public. He does agree, however, to organize a grand party at the villa. The night of the party, while guests in formal attire waltz in the ballroom, Maria and the children look on from the garden terrace. When the Captain notices Maria teaching Kurt the traditional Ländler folk dance, he cuts in and dances with Maria in a graceful performance, culminating in a close embrace. Confused about her feelings, Maria blushes and breaks away. Later, the Baroness, who noticed the Captain's attraction to Maria, hides her jealousy while convincing Maria that she must return to the abbey. Back at the abbey, when Mother Abbess learns that Maria has stayed in seclusion to avoid her feelings for the Captain, she encourages her to return to the villa to look for her life. After Maria returns to the villa, she learns about the Captain's engagement to the Baroness and agrees to stay until they find a replacement governess. The Captain's feelings for Maria, however, have not changed, and after breaking off his engagement the Captain marries Maria.

text: While they are on their honeymoon, Max enters the children in the Salzburg Festival against their father's wishes. When they learn that Austria has been annexed by the Third Reich in the Anschluss, the couple return to their home, where a telegram awaits informing the Captain that he must report to the German Naval base at Bremerhaven to accept a commission in the German Navy. Strongly opposed to the Nazis and the Anschluss, the Captain tells his family they must leave Austria immediately. Many of the Von Trapp's friends are prepared to accept the new regime, including Rolf, who Liesl is devastated to see has joined the Hitler youth. That night, as the von Trapp family attempt to leave, they are stopped by a group of Brownshirts waiting outside the villa. When questioned by Gauleiter Hans Zeller, the Captain maintains they are headed to the Salzburg Festival to perform. Zeller insists on escorting them to the festival, after which his men will accompany the Captain to Bremerhaven.

text: Later that night at the festival, during their final number, the von Trapp family slip away and seek shelter at the nearby abbey, where Mother Abbess hides them in the cemetery crypt. Brownshirts soon arrive and search the abbey, and the family is discovered by Rolf. Upon seeing Liesl, he hesitates raising the alarm long enough to allow the family time to flee, and the family is able to escape using the caretaker's car. When the soldiers attempt to pursue, they discover their cars will not start as two nuns have removed parts of the engines. The next morning, after driving to the Swiss border, the von Trapp family make their way on foot across the frontier into Switzerland to safety and freedom.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Julie Andrews as Maria von Trapp
Christopher Plummer as Captain von Trapp

Bill Lee as Captain von Trapp's singing voice

Eleanor Parker as Baroness Elsa von Schraeder
Richard Haydn as Max Detweiler
Peggy Wood as the Mother Abbess
Charmian Carr as Liesl von Trapp
Nicholas Hammond as Friedrich von Trapp
Heather Menzies as Louisa von Trapp
Duane Chase as Kurt von Trapp
Angela Cartwright as Brigitta von Trapp
Debbie Turner as Marta von Trapp
Kym Karath as Gretl von Trapp
Anna Lee as Sister Margaretta
Portia Nelson as Sister Berthe
Ben Wright as Herr Zeller
Daniel Truhitte as Rolfe
Norma Varden as Frau Schmidt
Gil Stuart as Franz
Marni Nixon as Sister Sophia
Ada Beth Lee as Sister Catherine
Doreen Tryden as Sister Agatha
Evadne Baker as Sister Bernice
Doris Lloyd as Baroness Ebberfeld

tag: ul

text: Background[edit]

text: The Sound of Music story is based on Maria von Trapp's memoir, The Story of the Trapp Family Singers, published in 1949 to help promote her family's singing group following the death of her husband Georg in 1947.[5] Hollywood producers expressed interest in purchasing the title only, but Maria refused, wanting her entire story to be told.[5] In 1956, German producer Wolfgang Liebeneiner purchased the film rights for $9,000 (equivalent to $81,000 in 2017), hired George Hurdalek and Herbert Reinecker to write the screenplay, and Franz Grothe to supervise the soundtrack, which consisted of traditional Austrian folk songs.[6] The Trapp Family was released in West Germany on October 9, 1956 and became a major success.[5] Two years later, Liebeneiner directed a sequel, The Trapp Family in America, and the two pictures became the most successful films in West Germany during the post-war years.[5] Their popularity extended throughout Europe and South America.[5]

text: In 1956, Paramount Pictures purchased the United States film rights, intending to produce an English-language version with Audrey Hepburn as Maria.[5] The studio eventually dropped its option, but one of its directors, Vincent J. Donehue, proposed the story as a stage musical for Mary Martin.[5] Producers Richard Halliday and Leland Heyward secured the rights and hired playwrights Howard Lindsay and Russel Crouse, who had won the Pulitzer Prize for State of the Union.[6] They approached Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II to compose one song for the musical, but the composers felt the two styles—traditional Austrian folk songs and their composition—would not work together.[6] They offered to write a complete new score for the entire production if the producers were willing to wait while they completed work on Flower Drum Song.[7] The producers quickly responded that they would wait as long as necessary.[7] The Sound of Music stage musical opened on November 16, 1959 at the Lunt-Fontanne Theatre in New York City and ran on Broadway for 1,443 performances, winning six Tony Awards, including Best Musical.[8] In June 1960, Twentieth Century Fox purchased the film adaptation rights to the stage musical for $1.25 million (equivalent to $10,300,000 in 2017) against ten percent of the gross.[9][Note 1]

text: Production[edit]

text: For the film, Richard Rodgers added two new songs, "I Have Confidence" and "Something Good", for which he wrote the lyrics as well as the music (Hammerstein having died in August 1960), while three of the original stage songs were omitted,[10] "How Can Love Survive", "No Way To Stop It" and "An Ordinary Couple". Arranger and conductor Irwin Kostal prerecorded the songs with a large orchestra and singers on a stage prior to the start of filming, and later adapted instrumental underscore passages based on the songs. Choreographers Marc Breaux and Dee Dee Wood, who had worked with Andrews on Mary Poppins, worked out all new choreography sequences that incorporated many of the Salzburg locations and settings. The Sound of Music was filmed from March 26 through September 1, 1964, with external scenes shot on location in Salzburg, Austria, and the surrounding region, and interior scenes filmed at the 20th Century Fox studios in California. The movie was photographed in 70 mm Todd-AO by Ted McCord and produced with DeLuxe Color processing and six-track sound recording.

text: Screenplay and pre-production[edit]

text: In December 1962, 20th Century Fox president Richard D. Zanuck hired Ernest Lehman to write the screenplay for the film adaptation of the stage musical.[11] Lehman reviewed the original script for the stage musical, rearranged the sequence of songs, and began transforming a work designed for the stage into a film that could use the camera to emphasize action and mood, and open the story up to the beautiful locations of Salzburg and the Austrian Alps.[12] The "Do-Re-Mi" sequence in the play, for example, was originally a stagnant number; Lehman transformed it into a lively montage showing some of the beautiful sites of Salzburg, as well as showing Maria and the children growing closer over time.[12] Lehman also eliminated two songs, "How Can Love Survive?" and "No Way to Stop It", sung by the characters of Elsa and Max.[12] In January 1963, he saw the Fox English-dubbed version of the two German films, was not especially impressed, and decided to use the stage musical and Maria's memoir for most of his source material.[13] While Lehman was developing the screenplay, he and Zanuck began looking for a director. Their first choice was Robert Wise, with whom Lehman had worked on the film adaptation of West Side Story, but Wise was busy preparing work for another film, The Sand Pebbles.[14] Other directors were approached and turned down the offer, including Stanley Donen, Vincent J. Donehue, George Roy Hill, and Gene Kelly.[15]

text: In January 1963, Lehman invited one of his favorite directors, William Wyler, to travel to New York City with him to see the Broadway musical. After seeing the show, Wyler said he hated it, but after two weeks of Lehman's persuasion, Wyler reluctantly agreed to direct and produce the film.[16] After hiring musical supervisor Roger Edens, Wyler, Lehman, and Edens traveled to Salzburg to scout filming locations.[17] In two weeks they managed to see approximately seventy-five locations—an experience that helped Lehman conceptualize several important sequences.[18] During that trip, Lehman began to have reservations about Wyler's commitment to the project, and communicated this to Zanuck, who instructed the writer to finalize the first draft of the screenplay as quickly as possible.[19] Lehman completed the first draft on September 10, 1963 and sent it to Wyler, who had no suggestions or changes.[19] At that time, Lehman also secretly gave a copy of the script to the agent of Robert Wise, whom Lehman still wanted as the director.[19] Later that month, Wyler's agent approached Zanuck asking that production on the film be delayed so Wyler could direct The Collector. Zanuck told him to tell Wyler to make the other film, and that they would move ahead on schedule with another director, ending Wyler's participation.[19]

text: Meanwhile, Wise, whose film The Sand Pebbles had been postponed, read Lehman's first draft, was impressed by what he read, and agreed to direct the film.[20] Wise joined the picture in October 1963,[21] and flew to Salzburg with associate producer Saul Chaplin and members of his production team to scout filming locations, including many that Wyler had identified.[22] When he returned, Wise began working on the script. Wise shared Lehman's vision of the film being centered on the music, and the changes he made were consistent with the writer's approach—mainly reducing the amount of sweetness and sentimentality found in the stage musical.[21] He had reservations about Lehman's opening aerial sequence because they'd used a similar opening in West Side Story, but decided to keep it.[21] Other changes included replacing "An Ordinary Couple" with a more romantic number, and a new song for Maria's departure from the abbey—Rodgers provided "Something Good" and "I Have Confidence" especially for the film.[23] Lehman completed the second draft on December 20, 1963,[24] but additional changes would be made based on input from Maria von Trapp and Christopher Plummer about the character of the Captain. Plummer especially helped transform a character lacking substance into a stronger, more forceful complex figure with a wry sense of humor and a darker edge.[25] Lehman completed his final draft on March 20, 1964.[26]

text: Casting and rehearsals[edit]

text: Lehman's first and only choice for Maria was Julie Andrews.[27] When Wise joined the project, he made a list of his choices for the role, which included Andrews as his first choice, Grace Kelly, and Shirley Jones.[28] Wise and Lehman went to Disney Studios to view footage from Mary Poppins, which was not yet released. A few minutes into the film, Wise told Lehman, "Let's go sign this girl before somebody else sees this film and grabs her!"[27] Andrews had some reservations—mainly about the amount of sweetness in the theatrical version—but when she learned that her concerns were shared by Wise and Lehman and what their vision was, she signed a contract with Fox to star in The Sound of Music and one other film for $225,000 (equivalent to $1,780,000 in 2017).[29] Wise had a more difficult time casting the role of the Captain. A number of actors were considered for the part, including Bing Crosby, Yul Brynner, Sean Connery, and Richard Burton.[30] Wise had seen Christopher Plummer on Broadway and wanted him for the role, but the stage actor turned down the offer several times. Wise flew to London to meet with Plummer and explained his concept of the film; the actor accepted after being assured that he could work with Lehman to improve the character;[31] Plummer later described himself as having become quite arrogant at the time, "spoiled by too many great theater roles".[32]

text: Wise also spent considerable time and effort on casting the secondary characters. For the role of Max Detweiler, Wise initially considered Victor Borge, Noël Coward, and Hal Holbrook among others before deciding on Richard Haydn.[31] For the character of Baroness Elsa Schraeder, Wise looked for a "name" actress—Andrews and Plummer were not yet widely known to film audiences—and decided on Eleanor Parker.[33] The casting of the children characters began in November 1963 and involved over two hundred interviews and auditions throughout the United States and England.[34] Some of the child-actors interviewed or tested, who were not selected, included Mia Farrow, Patty Duke, Lesley Ann Warren, Geraldine Chaplin, Shelley Fabares, Teri Garr, Kurt Russell, and The Osmonds.[35] Most of the actors selected had some acting, singing, or dancing experience. Charmian Carr, however, was a model who worked part-time in a doctor's office and had no ambition to pursue a career as an actress.[36] After a friend sent her photo to Wise's office, she was asked to interview. Wise later recalled, "She was so pretty and had such poise and charm that we liked her immediately."[36] The last person to be cast was Daniel Truhitte in the role of Rolfe.[36]

text: Rehearsals for the singing and dance sequences began on February 10, 1964.[37] The husband-and-wife team of Marc Breaux and Dee Dee Wood, who had worked with Andrews on Mary Poppins, worked out the choreography with Saul Chaplin on piano—the arrangements could not be altered under Rodgers and Hammerstein's contract.[38] The stage choreography was not used because it was too restrictive.[39] Breaux and Wood worked out all new choreography better suited for film that incorporated many of the Salzburg locations and settings.[39] They even choreographed the newly added puppet dance sequence for "The Lonely Goatherd".[40] The choreography for the Ländler strictly followed the traditional Austrian folk dance.[39] The musical arranger Irwin Kostal prerecorded the songs with a large orchestra and singers on a stage prior to the start of filming.[41] Kostal used seven children and five adults to record the children's voices; the only scene where the child-actors actually sing is when they sing "The Sound of Music" on their own after Maria leaves.[42] The voices of some of the adult actors also had voice doubles, including Peggy Wood and Christopher Plummer.[43]

text: Filming and post-production[edit]

text: Principal photography began on March 26, 1964 at 20th Century Fox studios in Los Angeles, where scenes from Maria's bedroom and the abbey cloister and graveyard were filmed.[44] The company then flew to Salzburg where filming resumed on April 23 at Mondsee Abbey for the wedding scenes.[45] From April 25 through May 22, scenes were filmed at the Felsenreitschule, Nonnberg Abbey, Mirabell Palace Gardens, Residence Fountain, and various street locations throughout the Altstadt (Old Town) area of the city.[45] Wise faced opposition from city leaders who opposed him staging scenes with swastika banners. They relented after he threatened instead to include actual newsreel footage of crowds cheering Hitler during a visit to the town.[32] On days when it rained—a constant challenge for the company[46]—Wise arranged for scenes to be shot at St. Margarethen Chapel and Dürer Studios (Reverend Mother's office).[47] From May 23 to June 7, the company worked at Schloss Leopoldskron and an adjacent property called Bertelsmann for scenes representing the lakeside terrace and gardens of the von Trapp villa.[48] From June 9 to 19, scenes were shot at Frohnburg Palace which represented the front and back façades of the villa.[48] The "Do-Re-Mi" picnic scene in the mountains was filmed above the town of Werfen in the Salzach River valley on June 25 and 27.[48] The opening sequence of Maria on her mountain was filmed from June 28 to July 2 at Mehlweg mountain near the town of Marktschellenberg in Bavaria.[49][Note 2] The final scene of the von Trapp family escaping over the mountains was filmed on the Obersalzberg in the Bavarian Alps.[50]

text: The cast and crew flew back to Los Angeles and resumed filming at Fox studios on July 6 for all remaining scenes, including those in the villa dining room, ballroom, terrace, living room, and gazebo.[51] Following the last two scenes shot in the gazebo—for the songs "Something Good" and "You Are Sixteen"—principal photography concluded on September 1, 1964.[51] A total of eighty-three scenes were filmed in just over five months.[52] Post-production work began on August 25 with three weeks of dialogue dubbing to correct lines that were ruined by various street noises and rain.[53] In October, Christopher Plummer's singing voice was dubbed by veteran Disney playback singer Bill Lee.[54] The film was then edited by Wise and film editor William Reynolds.[55] Once the film was edited, Irwin Kostal, who orchestrated the musical numbers, underscored the film with background music consisting of variations on Rodgers and Hammerstein's original songs to amplify or add nuances to the visual images.[54][55] When dubbing, editing, and scoring were complete, Wise arranged for two sneak-preview showings—the first one held in Minneapolis on Friday January 15, 1965[56] at the Mann Theater, and the second one held the following night in Tulsa.[57] Despite the "sensational" responses from the preview audiences, Wise made a few final editing changes before completing the film.[57] According to the original print information for the film, the running time for the theatrical release version was 174 minutes.[1] The film was eventually given a G rating by the Motion Picture Association of America.[1]

text: The Sound of Music was filmed in 70 mm Todd-AO by Ted McCord and produced with DeLuxe Color processing.[58] Aerial footage was photographed with an MCS-70 camera.[58] The sound was recorded on 70 mm six-track using a Westrex recording system.[1][58] The sets used for the film were based on the storyboards of sketch artist Maurice Zuberano,[59] who accompanied Wise to Austria to scout filming locations in November 1963.[60] Wise met with the artist over a ten-week period and explained his objective for each scene—the feeling he wanted to convey and the visual images he wanted to use.[59] When Zuberano was finished, he provided Wise with a complete set of storyboards that illustrated each scene and set—storyboards the director used as guidance during filming.[59] Zuberano's storyboards and location photos were also used by art director Boris Leven to design and construct all of the original interior sets at Fox studios, as well as some external sets in Salzburg.[61] The von Trapp villa, for example, was actually filmed in several locations: the front and back façades of the villa were filmed at Frohnburg Palace, the lakeside terrace and gardens were a set constructed on a property adjacent to Schloss Leopoldskron called Bertelsmann, and the interior was a constructed set at Fox studios.[62] The gazebo scenes for "Something Good" and "Sixteen Going on Seventeen" were filmed on a larger reconstructed set at Fox studios, while some shots of the original gazebo were filmed on the grounds at Schloss Leopoldskron in Salzburg.[63][64][Note 3]

text: Release[edit]

text: Marketing[edit]

text: Robert Wise hired Mike Kaplan to direct the publicity campaign for the film.[65] After reading the script, Kaplan decided on the ad line "The Happiest Sound in All the World", which would appear on promotional material and artwork.[65] Kaplan also brought in outside agencies to work with the studio's advertising department to develop the promotional artwork, eventually selecting a painting by Howard Terpning of Andrews on an alpine meadow with her carpetbag and guitar case in hand with the children and Plummer in the background.[66][67][Note 4] In February 1964, Kaplan began placing ads in the trade papers Daily Variety, Weekly Variety, and The Hollywood Reporter to attract future exhibitor interest in the project.[65] The studio intended the film to have an initial roadshow theatrical release in select large cities in theaters that could accommodate the 70-mm screenings and six-track stereophonic sound.[68] The roadshow concept involved two showings a day with reserved seating and an intermission similar to Broadway musicals.[68] Kaplan identified forty key cities that would likely be included in the roadshow release and developed a promotional strategy targeting the major newspapers of those cities.[66] During the Salzburg production phase, 20th Century Fox organized press junkets for America journalists to interview Wise and his team and the cast members.[66]

text: Critical response[edit]

text:
"No one is comfortable with an excess of hearts and flowers, but there is no valid reason for hiding honest emotion. This has always been a major element in the theatre, and it's my conviction that anyone who can't, on occasion, be sentimental about children, home or nature is sadly maladjusted."[69]

Richard Rodgers

tag: div

text: The film had its opening premiere on March 2, 1965 at the Rivoli Theater in New York City.[70][71] Initial reviews were mixed.[72] Bosley Crowther, in The New York Times, criticized the film's "romantic nonsense and sentiment", the children's "artificial roles", and Robert Wise's "cosy-cum-corny" direction.[73] Judith Crist, in a biting review in the New York Herald Tribune, dismissed the movie as "icky sticky" and designed for "the five to seven set and their mommies".[70] In her review for McCall's magazine, Pauline Kael called the film "the sugar-coated lie people seem to want to eat", and that audiences have "turned into emotional and aesthetic imbeciles when we hear ourselves humming the sickly, goody-goody songs".[74] [Note 5] Wise later recalled, "The East Coast, intellectual papers and magazines destroyed us, but the local papers and the trades gave us great reviews".[68] Indeed, reviewers such as Philip K. Scheuer of the Los Angeles Times described the film as "three hours of visual and vocal brilliance",[68] and Variety called it "a warmly-pulsating, captivating drama set to the most imaginative use of the lilting R-H tunes, magnificently mounted and with a brilliant cast".[68] The "wildly mixed film reviews" reflected the critical response to the stage musical, according to The Oxford Companion to the American Musical.[76] After its Los Angeles premiere on March 10, The Sound of Music opened in 131 theaters in the United States, including a limited number of roadshow events.[68] After four weeks, the film became the number one box office movie in the country, and held that position for thirty out of the next forty-three weeks in 1965.[77] The original theatrical release of the film in America lasted four and a half years.[77]

text: A few months after its United States release, The Sound of Music opened in 261 theaters overseas—the first American movie to be completely dubbed in a foreign language, both dialogue and music.[78] The German, French, Italian, and Spanish versions were completely dubbed, the Japanese version had Japanese dialogue with English songs, and other versions were released with foreign subtitles. The film was a popular success in every country it opened, except the two countries where the story originated, Austria and Germany.[79] In these countries, the film had to compete with the much-loved Die Trapp-Familie (1956), which provided the original inspiration for the Broadway musical, and its sequel Die Trapp-Familie in Amerika (1958)—both films still widely popular in German-speaking Europe and considered the authoritative von Trapp story.[79] Austrians took exception to the liberties taken by the filmmakers with regard to the costumes, which did not reflect traditional style, and the replacement of traditional Austrian folk songs with Broadway show tunes.[79] The film's Nazi theme was especially unpopular in Germany, where the Munich branch manager for 20th Century Fox approved the unauthorized cutting of the entire third act of the film following the wedding sequence—the scenes showing Salzburg following the Anschluss. Robert Wise and the studio intervened, the original film was restored, and the branch manager was fired.[80] The Sound of Music has never been popular in Austria and Germany.[81]

text: Box office[edit]

text: The Sound of Music is one of the most commercially successful films of all time.[82] Four weeks after its theatrical release, it became the number one box office movie in the United States, from revenue generated by twenty-five theaters, each screening only ten roadshow performances per week.[77] It held the number one position for thirty of the next forty-three weeks,[77] and ended up the highest-grossing film of 1965.[83] One contributing factor in the film's early commercial success was the repeat business of many filmgoers.[78] In some cities in the United States, the number of tickets sold exceeded the total population.[78][Note 6] By January 1966, the film had earned $20 million in distributor rentals from just 140 roadshow engagements in the United States and Canada.[84] Overseas, The Sound of Music broke previous box-office records in twenty-nine countries,[85] including the United Kingdom, where the film earned £4 million in rentals and grossed £6 million—more than twice as much as any other film had ever taken in.[85] By November 1966, The Sound of Music had become the highest-grossing film of all-time,[85] surpassing Gone with the Wind, which held that distinction for twenty-four years.[86][Note 7]

text: In November 1969, The Sound of Music completed its initial four-and-a-half year theatrical release run in the United States, having earned $68,313,000 in North American (United States and Canada) rentals and $44,168,000 in foreign rentals, for a worldwide total of $112,481,000 in gross returns.[87] It was the first film to gross over $100 million.[88] The film was re-released in 1973,[89][90] and increased its North American rentals to $78.4 million.[91] By the end of the 1970s, it was ranked seventh in all time North American rentals, having earned $79 million.[92] The film's re-release in 1990[90] increased the total North American admissions to 142,415,400—the third highest number of tickets sold behind Gone with the Wind and Star Wars—and about 283.3 million admissions worldwide.[93][94] The Sound of Music eventually earned a total domestic gross of $163,214,076, and a total worldwide gross of $286,214,076.[95] Adjusted for inflation, the film earned about $2.366 billion at 2014 prices—the fifth highest-grossing film of all time.[93][96]

text: Historical accuracy[edit]

text: The Sound of Music film, like the stage musical, presents a history of the von Trapp family that is not completely accurate. The filmmakers used artistic license to convey the essence and meaning of their story. Georg Ludwig von Trapp was indeed an anti-Nazi opposed to the Anschluss, and lived with his family in a villa in a district of Salzburg called Aigen. Their lifestyle depicted in the film, however, greatly exaggerated their standard of living. The actual family villa, located at Traunstraße 34, Aigen 5026, was large and comfortable but not nearly as grand as the mansion depicted in the film. The house was also not their ancestral home, as depicted in the film. The family had previously lived in homes in Zell Am See and Klosterneuburg after being forced to abandon their actual ancestral home in Pola following World War I. Georg moved the family to the Salzburg villa shortly after the death of his first wife in 1922.[97] In the film, Georg is referred to as "Baron", but his actual family title was "Ritter" (German for "knight"), a hereditary knighthood the equivalent of which in the United Kingdom is a baronetcy. Austrian nobility, moreover, was legally abolished in 1919 and the nobiliary particle von was proscribed after World War I, so he was legally "Georg Trapp". Both the title and the prepositional nobiliary particle von, however, continued to be widely used unofficially as a matter of courtesy.[97]

text: Georg was offered a position in the Kriegsmarine, but this occurred before the Anschluss. He was heavily recruited by the Nazis because he had extensive experience with submarines, and Germany was looking to expand its fleet of U-boats. With his family in desperate financial straits, and having no other marketable skills other than his training as a naval officer, he seriously considered the offer before deciding he could not serve a Nazi regime. Rather than threaten arrest, the Nazis actually continued to woo him.[97] In the film, Georg is depicted initially as a humorless, emotionally distant father. In reality, third child Maria von Trapp (called "Louisa" in the film) described her father as a doting parent who made handmade gifts for the children in his woodshop and who would often lead family musicales on his violin. She has a different recollection of her stepmother, whom she described as moody and prone to outbursts of rage. In a 2003 interview, Maria remembered, "[She] had a terrible temper ... and from one moment to the next, you didn't know what hit her. We were not used to this. But we took it like a thunderstorm that would pass, because the next minute she could be very nice."[98]

text: Maria Augusta Kutschera had indeed been a novice at Nonnberg Abbey in Salzburg and had been hired by the von Trapp family. However, she was hired only to be a tutor to young Maria Franziska ("Louisa" in the movie), who had come down with scarlet fever and needed her lessons at home, not to be a governess for all of the children.[97] Maria and Georg married for practical reasons, rather than love and affection for each other. Georg needed a mother for his children, and Maria needed the security of a husband and family once she decided to leave the abbey. "I really and truly was not in love," Maria wrote in her memoir, "I liked him but didn't love him. However, I loved the children, so in a way I really married the children." They were married in 1927, not in 1938 as depicted in the film, and the couple had been married for over a decade by the time of the Anschluss and had two of their three children together by that time. Maria later acknowledged that she grew to love Georg over time and enjoyed a happy marriage.[97]

text: The von Trapp family lost most of its wealth during the worldwide depression of the early 1930s, when the Austrian national bank folded.[97] In order to survive, the family dismissed the servants and began taking in boarders. They also started singing onstage to earn money—a fact that caused the proud Georg much embarrassment.[99] In the film, the von Trapp family hike over the Alps from Austria to Switzerland to escape the Nazis, which would not have been possible; Salzburg is over two hundred miles from Switzerland. The von Trapp villa, however, was only a few kilometers from the Austria–Germany border, and the final scene shows the family hiking on the Obersalzberg near the German town of Berchtesgaden, within sight of Adolf Hitler's Kehlsteinhaus Eagle's Nest retreat. In reality, the family simply walked to the local train station and boarded a train to Italy. Although Georg was an ethnic German-Austrian, he was also an Italian citizen, having been born in the Dalmatian city of Zadar, which at that time was part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and later fell into Italian territory after World War I. From Italy, they traveled to London and ultimately the United States.[97]

text: The character Max Detweiler, the scheming family music director, is fictional. The von Trapps' family priest, the Reverend Franz Wasner, was their musical director for over twenty years and accompanied them when they left Austria.[97] The character of Friedrich (the second oldest child in the film version) was based on Rupert, the oldest of the real von Trapp children. Liesl (the oldest child in the film) was based on Agathe von Trapp, the second oldest in the real family. The names and ages of the children were changed, in part because the third child (who would be portrayed as "Louisa") was also named Maria, and producers thought that it would be confusing to have two characters called Maria in the film.[97] The von Trapp family had no control over how they were depicted in the film and stage musical, having given up the rights to their story to a German producer in the 1950s who then sold the rights to American producers.[97] Robert Wise met with Maria von Trapp and made it clear, according to a memo to Richard Zanuck, that he was not making a "documentary or realistic movie" about her family, and that he would make the film with "complete dramatic freedom" in order to produce a "fine and moving film"—one they could all be proud of.[100]

text: Soundtrack[edit]

text: The soundtrack to The Sound of Music was written by Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II, and arranged and conducted by Irwin Kostal, who also adapted the instrumental underscore passages.[citation needed] The soundtrack album was released by RCA Victor in 1965 and is one of the most successful soundtrack albums in history, having sold over 20 million copies worldwide.[101][102]

text: The album reached the number one position on the Billboard 200 that year in the United States.[103][104] It remained in the top ten for 109 weeks, from May 1, 1965 to July 16, 1966,[105][106] and remained on the Billboard 200 chart for 238 weeks.[103] The album was the best-selling album in the United Kingdom in 1965, 1966 and 1968 and the second best-selling of the entire decade, spending a total of 70 weeks at number one on the UK Album Charts.[107] It also stayed 73 weeks on the Norwegian charts, becoming the seventh best-charting album of all time in that country.[108] In 2015, Billboard named the album the second greatest album of all time.[109][110]

text: The album has been reissued several times, including anniversary editions with additional tracks in 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and 2015.[104]

text: Accolades[edit]

text: Awards and nominations[edit]

text:
Award
Category
Nominee
Result
Ref

Academy Awards
Best Picture
Robert Wise
Won
[111]

Best Director
Robert Wise
Won
[111]

Best Actress in a Leading Role
Julie Andrews
Nominated
[111]

Best Actress in a Supporting Role
Peggy Wood
Nominated
[111]

Best Music (Scoring of Music – Adaptation or Treatment)
Irwin Kostal
Won
[111]

Best Cinematography (Color)
Ted D. McCord
Nominated
[111]

Best Art Direction (Color)
Boris Leven (art direction);
Walter M. Scott and Ruby R. Levitt (set decoration)
Nominated
[111]

Best Costume Design (Color)
Dorothy Jeakins
Nominated
[111]

Best Sound Recording
James Corcoran and Fred Hynes
Won
[111]

Best Film Editing
William H. Reynolds
Won
[111]

BAFTA Awards
Best British Actress
Julie Andrews
Nominated
[112]

Directors Guild of America
Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Motion Pictures
Robert Wise
Won
[113]

Golden Globe Awards
Best Motion Picture – Musical or Comedy
Robert Wise
Won
[113]

Best Director – Motion Picture
Robert Wise
Nominated
[113]

Best Motion Picture Actress – Musical or Comedy
Julie Andrews
Won
[113]

Best Supporting Actress – Motion Picture
Peggy Wood
Nominated
[113]

Laurel Awards
General Entertainment
The Sound of Music
Won
[114]

Musical Performance – Female
Julie Andrews
Won
[114]

National Board of Review
Top Ten Films of 1965
The Sound of Music
Won
[113]

New York Film Critics Circle
Best Actress
Julie Andrews
2nd place
[114]

Writers Guild of America
Best Written American Musical
Ernest Lehman
Won
[114]

text: AFI recognition[edit]

text: The Sound of Music has been included in numerous top film lists from the American Film Institute.

text:
AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies – No. 55[115]
AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies (10th Anniversary Edition) – No. 40[116]
AFI's 100 Years...100 Cheers – No. 41[117]
AFI's 100 Years of Musicals – No. 4[118]
AFI's 100 Years...100 Passions – No. 27[119]
AFI's 100 Years...100 Songs:

"The Sound of Music" – No. 10[120]
"My Favorite Things" – No. 64[120]
"Do-Re-Mi" – No. 88[120]

text: Legacy[edit]

text: In 1966, American Express created the first Sound of Music guided tour in Salzburg.[121] Since 1972, Panorama Tours has been the leading Sound of Music bus tour company in the city, taking approximately 50,000 tourists a year to various film locations in Salzburg and the surrounding region.[121] Sing-a-long Sound of Music revival screenings began in London in 1999, leading to a successful run at the Prince Charles Cinema which is ongoing as of 2016.[107][122] During the screenings, audience members are often dressed as nuns and von Trapp children and are encouraged to sing along to lyrics superimposed on the screen.[122] In July 2000, Sing-a-long Sound of Music shows opened in Boston and Austin, Texas.[122] Some audience members dressed up as cast members and interacted with the action shown on the screen.[122] The film began a successful run at the Ziegfeld Theatre in New York City in September 2000, with the opening attended by cast members Charmian Carr (Liesl), Daniel Truhitte (Rolfe), and Kym Karath (Gretl).[123] Sing-a-long Sound of Music screenings have since become an international phenomenon.[124]

text: In 2001, the United States Library of Congress selected the film for preservation in the National Film Registry, finding it "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant".[82] The Academy Film Archive preserved The Sound of Music in 2003.[125]

text: Television and home media[edit]

text: The first American television transmission of The Sound of Music was on February 29, 1976 on ABC, which paid $15 million for a one-time only broadcast that became one of the top-rated films ever shown on television to that point.[126] The movie was not shown again until NBC acquired the broadcast rights and telecast the film on February 11, 1979.[127] NBC continued to air the film annually for twenty years.[126] During most of its run on NBC, the film was heavily edited to fit a three-hour time slot—approximately 140 minutes without commercials. The thirty minutes edited out of the original film included portions of the "Morning Hymn and Alleluia" sung by the nuns, part of the dialogue between Mother Abbess and Maria in the abbey, part of Liesl and Rolfe's dialogue preceding "Sixteen Going on Seventeen", Liesl's verse of "Edelweiss" sung with the Captain, the Captain and Baroness waltzing at the party, and minor dialogue cuts within existing scenes.

text: The film aired in its uncut form (minus the entr'acte) on April 9, 1995, on NBC. Julie Andrews hosted the four-hour telecast which presented the musical numbers in a letterbox format. As the film's home video availability cut into its television ratings, NBC let their contract lapse in 2001. That year, the film was broadcast one time on the Fox network, in its heavily edited 140-minute version. Since 2002, the film has aired on ABC, generally during Christmas week, and has been broadcast on its sister cable network, Freeform, periodically around Easter and other holidays. Most of its more recent runs have been the full version in a four-hour time slot, complete with the entr'acte. ABC first broadcast a high definition version on December 28, 2008. On December 22, 2013, the annual broadcast had its highest ratings since 2007; the increase in ratings were credited to NBC's broadcast of The Sound of Music Live!—a live television adaptation of the original musical which aired earlier that month.[128]

text: In the United Kingdom, the film was first screened by the BBC on 25 December 1978 and, as of December 2016, fifteen times since, mostly around Christmas time. As the BBC is not funded by advertising there was no need to cut scenes to fit within a timeslot and the film was screened in the full 174-minute version without breaks.[129]

text: The film has been released on VHS, LaserDisc, and DVD numerous times. The first DVD version was released on August 29, 2000 to commemorate the 35th anniversary of the film's release.[130] The film is often included in box sets with other Rodgers & Hammerstein film adaptations.[130] A 40th anniversary DVD, with "making of" documentaries and special features, was released on November 15, 2005.[130] The film made its debut issue on Blu-ray Disc on November 2, 2010, for its 45th anniversary.[130][131][132] For the Blu-ray release, the original 70 mm negatives were rescanned at 8K resolution, then restored and remastered at 4K resolution for the transfer to Blu-ray, giving the most detailed copy of the film seen thus far. On March 10, 2015, Fox Home Entertainment released The Sound of Music 50th Anniversary Ultimate Collector's Edition—a five-disc set featuring thirteen hours of bonus features, including a new documentary, The Sound of a City: Julie Andrews Returns to Salzburg.[130][133] A March 2015 episode of ABC's 20/20 entitled The Untold Story of the Sound of Music featured a preview of the documentary and interviews by Diane Sawyer.[134]

text: Notes[edit]

text:
Jump up ^ Twentieth Century Fox also purchased the rights to the two German films for distribution in the United States. Fox combined the two films, Die Trapp-Familie and Die Trapp-Familie in Amerika, dubbed them in English, and released them as a single 106-minute film titled The Trapp Family, which was released on April 19, 1961.[9]
Jump up ^ Maria's morning run back to Nonnberg Abbey would have been about 11 miles (18 km).
Jump up ^ At the conclusion of filming at Schloss Leopoldskron, 20th Century Fox left behind the original gazebo as a gift to the city. The film's later popularity, however, led many fans to trespass onto the private and secluded lakefront property. To provide fans easier access to the famous structure, the city moved it to its present location at Hellbrunn Palace Park.[63]
Jump up ^ Terpning also created the poster artwork for Lawrence of Arabia, Doctor Zhivago, The Sand Pebbles, The Guns of Navarone, and the 1967 theatrical re-release of Gone with the Wind.[67] He is also known for his numerous magazine covers and his paintings of the American West and the Plains Indians.[67]
Jump up ^ Pauline Kael's review for McCall's generated a significant negative response from readers and contributed to her dismissal from the magazine.[74][75]
Jump up ^ In Salt Lake City, Utah (population 199,300), for example, 309,000 tickets were sold in forty weeks.[78] In Albany, New York (population 156,000), 176,536 tickets were sold in twenty-seven weeks.[78] In Orlando, Florida (population 88,135), 105,181 tickets were sold in thirty-five weeks.[78]
Jump up ^ The Sound of Music remained the highest-grossing film of all time for five years until 1971, when Gone with the Wind recaptured the crown following its successful 1967 widescreen rerelease.

tag: ol


document_title: List of Olympic Games host cities

question_text: what was the first american city to host the olympic games

text: List of Olympic Games host cities

text: Olympic Games host cities[edit]

text:
City
Country
Continent
Summer (Olympiad)
Winter
Year
Opening Ceremony
Closing Ceremony

Athens
 Greece
Europe
S005I

1896
000000002018-04-06-0000April 6
000000002018-04-15-0000April 15

Paris
 France
Europe
S005II

1900
000000002018-05-14-0000May 14
000000002018-10-28-0000October 28

St. Louis[a]
 United States
North America
S005III

1904
000000002018-07-01-0000July 1
000000002018-11-23-0000November 23

London[c]
 United Kingdom
Europe
S005IV

1908
000000002018-04-27-0000April 27
000000002018-10-31-0000October 31

Stockholm
 Sweden
Europe
S005V

1912
000000002018-05-05-0000May 5
000000002018-07-22-0000July 22

Berlin
 Germany
Europe
S006VI

1916
Cancelled due to WWI[4]

Antwerp[d]
 Belgium
Europe
S007VII

1920
000000002018-04-20-0000April 20
000000002018-09-12-0000September 12[5]

Chamonix
 France
Europe

W001I
1924
000000002018-01-25-0000January 25
000000002018-02-04-0000February 4[6]

Paris
 France
Europe
S008VIII

000000002018-05-04-0000May 4
000000002018-07-27-0000July 27[7]

St. Moritz
  Switzerland
Europe

W002II
1928
000000002018-02-11-0000February 11
000000002018-02-19-0000February 19[8]

Amsterdam
 Netherlands
Europe
S009IX

000000002018-05-17-0000May 17
000000002018-08-12-0000August 12[9]

Lake Placid
 United States
North America

W003III
1932
000000002018-02-04-0000February 4
000000002018-02-15-0000February 15[10]

Los Angeles
 United States
North America
S010X

000000002018-07-30-0000July 30
000000002018-08-14-0000August 14[11]

Garmisch-Partenkirchen
 Nazi Germany
Europe

W004IV
1936
000000002018-02-06-0000February 6
000000002018-02-16-0000February 16[12]

Berlin
 Nazi Germany
Europe
S011XI

000000002018-08-01-0000August 1
000000002018-08-16-0000August 16[13]

Sapporo
Garmisch-Partenkirchen[e]
 Empire of Japan
 Nazi Germany
Asia
Europe

W005aV
1940
Cancelled due to WWII[4]

Tokyo
Helsinki[f]
 Empire of Japan
 Finland
Asia
Europe
S012XII

Cortina d'Ampezzo
 Italy
Europe

W005bV
1944

London
 United Kingdom
Europe
S013XIII

St. Moritz
  Switzerland
Europe

W005cV
1948
000000002018-01-30-0000January 30
000000002018-02-08-0000February 8

London
 United Kingdom
Europe
S014XIV

000000002018-07-29-0000July 29
000000002018-08-14-0000August 14

Oslo
 Norway
Europe

W006VI
1952
000000002018-02-14-0000February 14
000000002018-02-25-0000February 25

Helsinki
 Finland
Europe
S015XV

000000002018-07-19-0000July 19
000000002018-08-03-0000August 3

Cortina d'Ampezzo
 Italy
Europe

W007VII
1956
000000002018-01-26-0000January 26
000000002018-02-05-0000February 5

Melbourne
Stockholm[g]
 Australia
 Sweden
Oceania
Europe
S016XVI

000000002018-11-22-0000November 22
000000002018-06-10-0000June 10
000000002018-12-08-0000December 8
000000002018-06-17-0000June 17

Squaw Valley
 United States
North America

W008VIII
1960
000000002018-02-18-0000February 18
000000002018-02-28-0000February 28

Rome
 Italy
Europe
S017XVII

000000002018-08-25-0000August 25
000000002018-09-11-0000September 11

Innsbruck
 Austria
Europe

W009IX
1964
000000002018-01-29-0000January 29
000000002018-02-09-0000February 9

Tokyo
 Japan
Asia
S018XVIII

000000002018-10-10-0000October 10
000000002018-10-24-0000October 24

Grenoble
 France
Europe

W010X
1968
000000002018-02-06-0000February 6
000000002018-02-18-0000February 18

Mexico City
 Mexico
North America
S019XIX

000000002018-10-12-0000October 12
000000002018-10-27-0000October 27

Sapporo
 Japan
Asia

W011XI
1972
000000002018-02-03-0000February 3
000000002018-02-13-0000February 13

Munich
 West Germany
Europe
S020XX

000000002018-08-26-0000August 26
000000002018-09-11-0000September 11

Innsbruck
 Austria
Europe

W012XII
1976
000000002018-02-04-0000February 4
000000002018-02-15-0000February 15

Montreal
 Canada
North America
S021XXI

000000002018-07-17-0000July 17
000000002018-08-01-0000August 1

Lake Placid
 United States
North America

W013XIII
1980
000000002018-02-12-0000February 12
000000002018-02-24-0000February 24

Moscow
 Soviet Union
Europe[h]
S022XXII

000000002018-07-19-0000July 19
000000002018-08-03-0000August 3

Sarajevo
 Yugoslavia
Europe

W014XIV
1984
000000002018-02-07-0000February 7
000000002018-02-19-0000February 19

Los Angeles
 United States
North America
S023XXIII

000000002018-07-28-0000July 28
000000002018-08-12-0000August 12

Calgary
 Canada
North America

W015XV
1988
000000002018-02-13-0000February 13
000000002018-02-28-0000February 28

Seoul
 South Korea
Asia
S024XXIV

000000002018-09-17-0000September 17
000000002018-10-02-0000October 2

Albertville
 France
Europe

W016XVI
1992
000000002018-02-08-0000February 8
000000002018-02-23-0000February 23

Barcelona
 Spain
Europe
S025XXV

000000002018-07-25-0000July 25
000000002018-08-09-0000August 9

Lillehammer
 Norway
Europe

W017XVII
1994
000000002018-02-12-0000February 12
000000002018-02-27-0000February 27

Atlanta
 United States
North America
S026XXVI

1996
000000002018-07-19-0000July 19
000000002018-08-04-0000August 4

Nagano
 Japan
Asia

W018XVIII
1998
000000002018-02-07-0000February 7
000000002018-02-22-0000February 22

Sydney
 Australia
Oceania
S027XXVII

2000
000000002018-09-15-0000September 15
000000002018-10-01-0000October 1

Salt Lake City
 United States
North America

W019XIX
2002
000000002018-02-08-0000February 8
000000002018-02-24-0000February 24

Athens
 Greece
Europe
S028XXVIII

2004
000000002018-08-13-0000August 13
000000002018-08-29-0000August 29

Torino
 Italy
Europe

W020XX
2006
000000002018-02-10-0000February 10
000000002018-02-26-0000February 26

Beijing[i]
 China
Asia
S029XXIX

2008
000000002018-08-08-0000August 8
000000002018-08-24-0000August 24

Vancouver
 Canada
North America

W021XXI
2010
000000002018-02-12-0000February 12
000000002018-02-28-0000February 28

London
 United Kingdom
Europe
S030XXX

2012
000000002018-07-27-0000July 27
000000002018-08-12-0000August 12

Sochi
 Russia
Europe[h]

W022XXII
2014
000000002018-02-07-0000February 7
000000002018-02-23-0000February 23

Rio de Janeiro
 Brazil
South America
S031XXXI

2016
000000002018-08-05-0000August 5
000000002018-08-21-0000August 21

Pyeongchang
 South Korea
Asia

W023XXIII
2018
000000002018-02-09-0000February 9
000000002018-02-25-0000February 25

Tokyo
 Japan
Asia
S032XXXII

2020
000000002018-07-24-0000July 24
000000002018-08-09-0000August 9

Beijing
 China
Asia

W024XXIV
2022
000000002018-02-04-0000February 4
000000002018-02-20-0000February 20

Paris
 France
Europe
S033XXXIII

2024
000000002018-07-26-0000July 26
000000002018-08-11-0000August 11

TBD
TBD

W025XXV
2026
(TBD)

Los Angeles
 United States
North America
S034XXXIV

2028
000000002018-07-21-0000July 21
000000002018-08-06-0000August 6

text: Host cities for multiple Summer and Winter Olympic Games[edit]

text:
List of cities that hosted multiple editions of the Olympic Games

City
Country
Continent
Summer Olympics
Winter Olympics
Total

London
 United Kingdom
Europe
3 (1908, 1948, 2012)
0
3

Paris
 France
Europe
3 (1900, 1924, 2024)
0

Los Angeles
 United States
North America
3 (1932, 1984, 2028)
0

Athens
 Greece
Europe
2 (1896, 2004)
0
2

Tokyo
 Japan
Asia
2 (1964, 2020)
0

Beijing
 China
Asia
1 (2008)
1 (2022)

St. Moritz
  Switzerland
Europe
0
2 (1928, 1948)

Innsbruck
 Austria
Europe
0
2 (1964, 1976)

Lake Placid
 United States
North America
0
2 (1932, 1980)

text: The 1906 Intercalated Games are not officially recognized by the IOC as an official Olympic Games.

text: Number of Olympic Games by country[edit]

text:
List of countries ranked by the number of times they hosted the Olympic Games

Rank
Country
Continent
Summer Olympics
Winter Olympics
Total

1
 United States
North America
5 (1904, 1932, 1984, 1996, 2028)
4 (1932, 1960, 1980, 2002)
9

2
 France
Europe
3 (1900, 1924, 2024)
3 (1924, 1968, 1992)
6

3
 Japan
Asia
2 (1940, 1964, 2020)
2 (1940, 1972, 1998)
4

4
 United Kingdom
Europe
3 (1908, 1944, 1948, 2012)
0
3

 Canada
North America
1 (1976)
2 (1988, 2010)

 Italy
Europe
1 (1960)
2 (1944, 1956, 2006)

 German Empire/ Nazi Germany/ West Germany/ Germany
Europe
2 (1916, 1936, 1972)
1 (1936, 1940)

8
 China
Asia
1 (2008)
1 (2022)
2

 South Korea
Asia
1 (1988)
1 (2018)

 Soviet Union/ Russia
Europe
1 (1980)
1 (2014)

 Greece
Europe
2 (1896, 2004)
0

 Australia
Oceania
2 (1956, 2000)
0

 Norway
Europe
0
2 (1952, 1994)

 Austria
Europe
0
2 (1964, 1976)

  Switzerland
Europe
0
2 (1928, 1940, 1948)

 Sweden
Europe
2 (1912, 1956 (equestrian events only))
0

17
 Brazil
South America
1 (2016)
0
1

 Spain
Europe
1 (1992)
0

 SFR Yugoslavia/ Bosnia and Herzegovina
Europe
0
1 (1984)

 Mexico
North America
1 (1968)
0

 Finland
Europe
1 (1940, 1952)
0

 Netherlands
Europe
1 (1928)
0

 Belgium
Europe
1 (1920)
0

text: Number of Olympic Games by continent[edit]

text:
Rank
Continent
Summer Olympics
Winter Olympics
Total

1
Europe
17 (1896, 1900, 1908, 1912, 1920, 1924, 1928, 1936, 1940, 1944, 1948, 1952, 1960, 1972, 1980, 1992, 2004, 2012, 2024)
14 (1924, 1928, 1936, 1940, 1944, 1948, 1952, 1956, 1964, 1968, 1976, 1984, 1992, 1994, 2006, 2014)
31

2
North America
7 (1904, 1932, 1968, 1976, 1984, 1996, 2028)
6 (1932, 1960, 1980, 1988, 2002, 2010)
13

3
Asia
4 (1940, 1964, 1988, 2008, 2020)
4 (1940, 1972, 1998, 2018, 2022)
8

4
Oceania
2 (1956, 2000)
0
2

5
South America
1 (2016)
0
1

6
Africa
0
0
0

text: Unsuccessful cities[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text:
Country
City
Bids

 United States
Detroit
7

 Hungary
Budapest
6

 Turkey
Istanbul
5

 Spain
Madrid
4

 Argentina
Buenos Aires
4

  Switzerland
Lausanne
4

 United States
Philadelphia
5

 United States
Chicago
4

 United States
Minneapolis
3

 Cuba
Havana
3

 Belgium
Brussels
3

 Azerbaijan
Baku
2

 Qatar
Doha
2

 Spain
Seville
2

 Yugoslavia/ Serbia
Belgrade
2

 Mexico
Guadalajara
2

 Mexico
Monterrey
1

 Puerto Rico
San Juan
1

 Australia
Brisbane
1

 Slovakia
Poprad
1

text: Notes[edit]

text: Olympics portal

text:
a Originally awarded to Chicago, but moved to St. Louis to coincide with the World's Fair.[14][15]
b The 1906 Games were sanctioned and treated as an Olympic Games when held, and they were recognized as an Olympic Games by the IOC until 1949[16]
c The 1908 Games were originally given to Rome, but were moved to London when Mount Vesuvius erupted.[17]
d The sailing events in 1920 were held in Ostend, Belgium and in Amsterdam, Netherlands.
e The 1940 winter games were originally awarded to Sapporo, but were moved to Garmisch-Partenkirchen before being cancelled.
f The 1940 summer games were originally awarded to Tokyo, but were moved to Helsinki before being cancelled.
g Equestrian events were held in Stockholm, Sweden. Stockholm had to bid for the equestrian competition separately; it received its own Olympic flame and had its own formal invitations and opening and closing ceremonies, just like the regular Summer Olympics.[18]
h Russia/Soviet Union spans the continents of Europe and Asia. However, the Russian National Olympic Committee is part of the European Olympic Committees. Also, Moscow is on the European side of the most commonly recognized boundary between Europe and Asia. (Sochi is in Asia per the usual geographic boundary, being just south of the Greater Caucasus' western end; but political approximations of the continental boundary place it in Europe.)
i Equestrian events were held in China's Hong Kong SAR.[19] Although Hong Kong's separate NOC conducted the equestrian competition, it was an integral part of the Beijing Games (unlike the 1956 Stockholm equestrian competition it was not conducted under a separate Hong Kong bid, separate flame, etc.).[20]