Course Hero Logo

PUP 432 NOTES TEST 2.pdf - Pup 432 test notes 1900 NYC -...

Course Hero uses AI to attempt to automatically extract content from documents to surface to you and others so you can study better, e.g., in search results, to enrich docs, and more. This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 6 pages.

Pup 432 test notes1900 NYC- Industrial revolution in Europe- Migration from Europe to U.S.-p. 45-46 Herbert Spencer / Rockefeller- map of NY explaining influx of German ideas where Police Power in 1916 was prozoning which was for exclusion purposes-NYC’s wealthy adopted ideas and excluded immigrants from migrating north- In lower Manhattan the population was1.) Suppressed2.) Social reform for sanitary conditions occurred3.) Structural Steel was invented new building ideas and city design began- Examples of individuals who began new city design and ideas / Daniel Burnham /Fredrick Law OlmsteadZONING ADOPTION HISTORY1.) Euclid v. Ambler- 1924 Local Government / Judge = Westenhaver- Ruled zoning unconstitutional / Winner = Ambler Real Estate- 1926 USSC reversed Westenhaver / made zoning constitutional under PolicePower- Start of preventative zoning / land use control2.) Under Herbert Hoover = (Conservative) Republican- Secretary of Commerce designed Model Legislatoin1.) Standard Zoning Enabling Act 1924 (SZEA)2.) Standard Planning Enabling Act 1928 (SPEA)- Suggested to State Legislature structure of Local Planning and ZoningAdministration under SZEA / SPEA- Within 10 years all 48 states adopted some type of legislation based on structure(HANDOUT)Police Power of zoning only for public Use, Health, and WelfareFrom 1928 Supreme Court did not handle any land use control cases until 1980Except 1954 Berman v. Parker (revitalize area, aesthetic nusicance, shop, they wanted totake his property away) Berman Vs. Parker was the only case which the court dealed withonly this case.p.92Hayek / Rockhill v. Chesterfeild- purpose of Chesterfeild was to keep zoning out- Chesterfeild had 3 land use zones
1.) Normal Agriculture2.) Residential Only3.) Special Uses- Rockhill sued over zoning descriptionsp. 9394Bartram v. City of Bridgeport- Bartram applied for permit to build a convenience store away from CoreBuilding District- Bridgeport had a policy against decentralized commercial- Bartram won case against Bridgeport and was granted permitKuehne v. Town of East Hartford-Kuehne did not apply to build a store-Built a store-Kuehne lost case and was rejected a permitp. 9497Fasano v. Washington County Oregon-Land under trial was zoned for residential use-It was then rezoned for a trailer park use-Benefit of case = establishment that the comprehensive plan controls thezoning and changing of zonesp. 97Neuberger v. City of Portland-Case issue = “presumption of legislative validity”-When legislature passes an ordinance you “presume” that it’s valid-(?)

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

End of preview. Want to read all 6 pages?

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Term
Summer
Professor
NoProfessor
Tags
Zoning, USSC

Newly uploaded documents

Show More

Newly uploaded documents

Show More

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture