Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: A new take on takings (AIB benefits of sprawl)

  1. #1

    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Solano County, California
    Posts
    6,468

    A new take on takings (AIB benefits of sprawl)

    AIB "benefits of sprawl"

    By subsidizing sprawl and encouraging the abandonment of central cities (often at their expense), can inner city residents claim that government policies have "taken" property value?

    Obviously not, but it's still an interesting thought exercise!

    From the Developing Stories blog http://juliaflint.net/aef/blog/:

    A new take
    What if homeowners in the inner city claimed that government policies encouraging sprawl had decreased the value of their property so much, it was the equivalent of a "taking" and they were entitled to just compensation under the Fifth Amendment? That was one of the more intriguing ideas to emerge from the 2nd National Summit on Equitable Development, Social Justice and Smart Growth in Philadelphia earlier this month, put on by Policy Link and the Funders Network for Smart Growth and Livable Communities. Former Albuquerque mayor David Rusk and Myron Orfield, director of the Institute on Race and Poverty at the University of Minnesota, said legal specialists were reviewing the possibility of such a landmark lawsuit. The idea is to flip around the accepted notion that government action can result in a de facto taking, the standard approach of property rights lawsuits coast to coast. In this lawsuit, property owners in a hollowed out city -- and one or two distressed first-ring suburbs -- would make the argument that government action to promote growth at the periphery sucked all the economic vitality out of their neighborhoods, leading to sharply decreased property values. It's too early to say whether this would go forward, but the legal papers in such a suit would have to include an exhaustive and detailed account of how state and local governments actively supported sprawl. It would be interesting reading.

  2. #2
    Unfrozen Caveman Planner mendelman's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    Staff meeting
    Posts
    8,916
    whoa...that is certainly stretching it.

    In order to argue such a position, one would have to explain away all the other intervening variables associated with the de-valuation of their properties.

    I would doubt there is any really tangile link between the policies and the market forces.
    I'm sorry. Is my bias showing?

    The ends can justify the means.

  3. #3

    Registered
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Solano County, California
    Posts
    6,468
    I know that, of course. I just thought this was a quirky way of looking at things.

  4. #4
    Cyburbian hilldweller's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Land of Confusion
    Posts
    3,790
    There are a lot more frivilous lawsuits than this one would be that cash in though.

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Takings legislation
    Make No Small Plans
    Replies: 2
    Last post: 16 Jun 2006, 1:00 PM
  2. APA and Takings/Condemnation
    Perry's Cantina (archive)
    Replies: 1
    Last post: 10 Sep 2005, 11:15 PM
  3. Takings question
    Land Use and Zoning
    Replies: 22
    Last post: 14 Sep 2003, 3:25 PM
  4. Zoning Regulatory takings
    Land Use and Zoning
    Replies: 0
    Last post: 06 Apr 1997, 1:57 PM
  5. Zoning Takings claims
    Land Use and Zoning
    Replies: 0
    Last post: 31 Mar 1997, 10:35 AM