CA Court of Appeals: Some Projects Require 'Urban Decay' Mitigation
When a new shopping center may leave existing retail areas short of business, a California court has ruled that mitigations of "urban decay" must be spelled out up front.
If an edge-of-town shopping center will cause "urban decay" in the form of lost downtown business, the EIR needs to spell out enforceable mitigation measures up front. That's one of several holdings in California Clean Energy Committee v. City of Woodland, a painstaking, meaty opinion by California's Third District Court of Appeal. The opinion was first issued in February with "unpublished" status. Some very smart lawyers who represent community groups recently persuaded the court to give the weight of precedent to the decision's core holdings.
Full Story:
Published on Tuesday, April 15, 2014 in
- How Detroit Beat the Silicon Valley to the Breakthrough Electric Vehicle
- Friday Eye Candy: Images of the World's Cities Through History
- If LEDs Are Bad for Our Health, What Should Cities Do Now?
- Google Maps Erases Publically Owned Open Spaces
- The Huge Cost of Improving Amtrak's Pennsylvanian Even a Little
- The Obama Administration Releases a Pro-Development Playbook
- Uber's Demand Curve Is a Breakthrough for Users and Economists
- A Generational Challenge: Ending the Age of the Automobile
- Op-Ed: Parking Concerns Can't Outweigh Affordable Housing
- New York Ponders How to Stop Cars from Parking in Bike Lanes
- 'The Well-Tempered City': An Epic Book, and Why
- Clean Power Plan Showdown in U.S. Appeals Court on Tuesday
- What the First Debate Taught About the Candidate's Positions on Cities
- Beer from Portlandia in the Land of the Rising Sun
- Building Houses in Wildfire Country
- Close to a Half Million Americans Lack Proper Plumbing
- Commuting in America 2015
- New York Has Plan to Make Room for Penn Station Renovations
- A Clever Way to End Cigarette Litter
- Jan Gehl on the Politics of Transforming Cities
