Town's Plan to Cap Residential Growth Violates State Law
A judge has overruled a voter-approved plan in the California city of Pleasanton to cap the number of new residences allowed in the city in an effort to curb the area's growing congestion.
The judge's ruling argues that the city's plan violates a state rule that requires cities to take on their fair share of regional population growth.
"The ruling is the first by a California judge to require a city to change its zoning to accommodate new housing, said attorney Richard Marcantonio of the nonprofit Public Advocates firm, which represented the plaintiffs in a lawsuit seeking to overturn the cap.
Those plaintiffs said Pleasanton was welcoming employees to office parks and other businesses, but forcing other cities to house them."
Full Story:
Published on Tuesday, March 16, 2010 in
Topics
- A 20-Year To-Do List for Cities
- The Argument Against Home Ownership
- As More 'Superstar' Cities Emerge, the Gap With Other Cities Grows
- Does the Plan to Revitalize a D.C. Canal Too Much Resemble the High Line?
- Study: Not All Gentrification Effects Are Equal
- Transit Oriented Development Shifts Into High Gear Near BART Stations in the Bay Area
- Multi-Family Market Grinds to a Halt in New York City
- U.S. Economic Growth Shows Urban-Rural Divide
- Report Makes Business Case for Vancouver-to-Portland High Speed Rail
- The Great O'Hare Race (And its Discontents)
- In Crosswalks, Public Art Meets Transportation
- Shuttering a Large Coal Plant: A Tale of Two States
- Controversial ADU Allowances Approved in Maryland
- The Post-Wildfire Dilemma: Rebuild or Retreat?
- Congressional Report on Transit Spending Stops Short of Accountability
- Public Opinion Differs on New Bay Area Road Diet
- Et Tu, Portland?
- Rethinking Downtown Streets in a Revitalizing Pittsburgh
- 'Community Preference' Housing Policy Under the Microscope on Either Side of the Country
- The Car-Centric World and the Ongoing Expansion of Police Powers
