Supreme Court: Building Moratorium Was Not A Taking
24 April 2002 - 8:00am
The U.S. Supreme Court rules that a temporary building moratorium was not an unconstitutional taking of property rights.
A 32-month building moratorium imposed while the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) prepared a land use plan was not an unconstitutional taking of property rights, the U.S. Supreme Court has held.The court explicitly rejected the argument from landowners that a government regulation that bars all economically viable uses of property for any period of time is a taking.
Source:
California Planning and Development Report, April 24, 2002
»
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
- The Appeal of In-Town Big Box - Feb 12, 2012
- San Francisco Businesses Thrive Without Parking - Jan 26, 2012
- In LA, Agricultural-Residential Zoned Neighborhoods Threatened - Jan 25, 2012
- Revealing Parking's Hidden Costs - Jan 20, 2012
- Tea Party Activists Disrupt Planning Meeting - Jan 12, 2012
“
Under the proposal, the government would assign the populace the task of counting and mapping dog droppings as a first step to greater penalties for owners who fail to clean up after their mutts.
”
Planetizen picks
Contribute
- Waste Disposal Becomes Sexy
- Murky Future for Two of D.C.'s Architectural Gems
- The Story Behind One of the Most Controversial Buildings in the Country
- The Benefits of Creating Hybrid Zoning Codes
- The Appeal of In-Town Big Box
- The Growing Appeal of Drinking From the Toilet
- How and Why Does an Architect Become Famous?
- Could Good Design Have Prevented the Housing Crisis?
- NY Times Defends the Port Authority
- Expanding the Hong Kong Subway, One Blast at a Time
Volunteerism Plays Critical Role in Reaching World’s Millennium Development Goals
Maxine Goodman Levin College of Urban Affairs, Cleveland State University
Feb 10, 2012
www.flickr.com
|
