Urban Planning Exam 2

Front 1

Police Power

Back 1

Government right to regulate for the protection of health, safety, morals, and welfare of society

Front 2

enabling statues

Back 2

fed allows state/local to make laws

generally called "home rule"

NY strong "home rule" state

Front 3

Eminent domain

Back 3

Government right to seize property for fair market value

Front 4

Nexus

Back 4

The link between the problem and the solution

Front 5

5th Amendment

Back 5

Takings - Nor shall property be taken for public use without just compensation

Front 6

14th Amendment

Back 6

No person shall be deprived life, liberty, or property without due process of law

right to seek judicial relief

Front 7

Berman vs Parker

Back 7

EMINENT DOMAIN

Berman owned furniture store that was in purchased area

PARKER - Eminent Domain can be used for ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE

Front 8

Kelou vs City of New London

Back 8

EMINENT DOMAIN

Redevelop working classes neighborhood near downtown

CITY OF NEW LONDON - Eminent Domain can be used achieving ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE

As a result 40+ states passed laws clearly defining how eminent domain can be used

Front 9

Hadacheck vs Sebastian

Back 9

ZONING

Hadacheck own mining and brick business
City of LA pass law no brick business in city limits

SEBASTIAN - Basis of public health

Legit exercise of POLICE POWER if it meet 5 CRITERIA

1. valid public purpose
2. by due process of law
3. it is not arbitrary
4. not discriminatory
5. does not take away all value of the land

Mining was still allowed so did not lose all value

Front 10

Village of Euclid vs Ambler

Back 10

ZONING

Euclid suburb divided village into zoning districts

Ambler wanted to build offices in residential area

EUCLID - upheld the constitutionality of zoning if it meets the 5 points

1. valid public purpose
2. by due process of law
3. it is not arbitrary
4. not discriminatory
5. does not take away all value of the land

Front 11

Nolan vs California Coastal Council

Back 11

NEXUS

Nolan wanted to build bigger house on ocean side property

Would allow if he gave public access to the beach on property

Nolan's bigger house obstructs ocean view

NOLAN - Nexus was not proven

Front 12

Dolan vs City of Tigard

Back 12

Dolan owned hardware store and wanted to double the size

Can double if dedicate 15' strip of land for trail system

DOLAN - Nexus was not met

Front 13

Penn Central Transportation Company vs NYC

Back 13

TAKINGS

NYC passed legislation that identified building to be "historically significant"

Penn Central wanted to build 50-story building on top of Grand Central Station

NYC - Regulations did not interfere with their reasonable rate of return on their investment

Front 14

Lucas vs South Carolina Coastal Commission

Back 14

TAKINGS

1986 -Lucas purchases beachfront property to build homes

1988 - SC passes law that disallowed Lucas from building

LUCAS - A takings did take place
PUBLIC HEALTH BENEFIT is trumped by TAKINGS taking place

Front 15

Palazzolo vs Rhode Island

Back 15

TAKINGS

Palazzolo bought waterfront property after RI law stated not wetlands could be filled in

1. Does he have a right to sue since law was passed before aquisition?
2. Is the case "Ripe for Review"? Go to court with out being told "No"
3. Did a takings take place?

1. PALAZZOLO - He did have a right to sue after law was passed
2. PALAZZOLO - It was apparent that he would be told "No"
3. NO RULING - PALAZZOLO altered argument

RHODE ISLAND SUPREME COURT
3. RHODE ISLAND - Takings did NOT take place
To prep land for use would gain minimal profits

Front 16

Comprehensive plan

Back 16

keep laws updated

treat similar situations the same

variance

consistency in regulations

Front 17

Growth Management

Back 17

Amount
Timing
Location
Character

Front 18

Growth Management 2

Back 18

Ensure a desirable land use pattern
Smart/sustainable
Provide for community service in conjunction with growth patterns
Minimize the fiscal impacts of development induced cost

Front 19

Golden vs Ramapo

Back 19

GROWTH MANAGEMENT

Ramapo passes development point requirements in order to receive building permit

Golden building homes on big lots
Exclusive to high income

RAMAPO - Taking did not take place, Golden was too exclusive

Front 20

States with lots of planing regulations

Back 20

Oregon, Hawaii, Florida, New Jersey

Front 21

"Tools in the Toolbox"

Back 21

Acquisition
Taxation
Regulations

Front 22

Acquisition -

Back 22

Aquiring full or partial rights to land

Front 23

Fee simple

Back 23

outright purchase of land for fair market value

Front 24

Easement

Back 24

Take away rights/restrictions on land

Acquired, Regulated or Donated

Positive - allowing access to land
Negative - not allowing access to land

Front 25

Taxation

Back 25

Non revenue objective
Payments in lieu of taxes - PILOT

Tax Breaks
Tax Forgiveness

Front 26

Tax breaks

Back 26

to continue farming and agree to not develop land

Front 27

Tax forgiveness

Back 27

given to encourage development

Front 28

Regulations

Back 28

Zoning
Sub division regulations
Site plan review

Front 29

Zoning

Back 29

Map or Text - controls the use of the land

places right restrictions on property owner

could limit the freedom of design - height, style, building could look boring

Front 30

Euclidean Model

Back 30

Use based, segregated land use, spread out

Front 31

Form based

Back 31

How it is structured on the land, interaction between building and street, more in line with smart growth

Front 32

If you have a zoning code...

Back 32

you must have a zoning board of appeals

quasi-judicial/ volunteer

Front 33

Zoning Appeals

Back 33

allow other interpretations of zoning law

Front 34

Zoning Variance

Back 34

An exemption from the requirement of the law

Front 35

Sub-division Regulations

Back 35

design and layout of parcels

Front 36

Site Plan Review

Back 36

restricted to the site, surrounding parcels have no effect on review

Front 37

Overlay district

Back 37

Enactment of special provisions in overlay district

Ex. # of feet from stream, historic district

Front 38

Transfer of Development rights

Back 38

transfer rights to build from one parcel top another

sending and receiving districts

market determines value of development rights

Front 39

Capital Improvement Planning

Back 39

6 years program, updated annually

What investments do we want in our community?

not an operating expense

project improvement
time frame
funding source

Front 40

Revenue Sources

Back 40

Property Tax
Income Tax
Special assessment
user charges
shared revenue
grants

Front 41

Impact fees

Back 41

regulations, one time fee based on added burdens that your proposal will create

no impact fees in NY > mitigation fees