Answer:
The Burgess and the Hoyt models of urbanization are two models that were created in order to explain the way in which urban land did, or should, be developed to respond to the needs of the city. Both systems were generated in the 1900´s, one by sociologist Ernest Burgess in 1925, and the other by economist Homer Hoyt in 1939.
There are some similarities that can be found between these two models. The first is that that Hoyt Model was born using as a basis the Burgess Model. This is why the colors, and distribution of certain settlement factors are so similar in both. Another similarity is that both models place the business district in the center of development in a city, and in both industrial development branches outward from the business district. There is also a consensus on both that the working class goes right after the industrial zoning and then the middle class.
However, there are also a lot of differences. First, the Burgess Model became unused when the Hoyt Model came out, because the second one explained better the newer patterns of urban development given the advent of faster modes of transportation, and hyperindustrialization. Thus, the Hoyt Model, although conserving some of the concentric circles of the other, proposed that urbanization was less circular in pattern, with the industrial zone branching from the business district but in ray-like patterns, most likely along routes of transport. Also, there was a partition of the people who settled in the city. Thus, while the working class settled as close as possible towards the rays of industrial development and the business center, in a semicircular form, the middle class tended more towards the suburbs and in the middle of this class, isolated, was now found a newer type of class, called the higher class, which branched out from the business district, almost like a ray, crossing through the middle class settlements, all the way towards the fringes.
These are some of the things that can be compared between the two models of urbanization.
