Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 29 of 29

Thread: Preemptive street/subdivision platting: Does it happen?

  1. #26
    Cyburbian mgk920's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Appleton, Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,166
    Quote Originally posted by raster calculator View post
    because without a connective street network, its hard to get a lot of other good planning ideas accomplished. So from the preceding discussion, it sounds like the devloper has to agree to the platted street plan. What happens if they disagree? Is the idea to make disagreement very costly for them?
    Is the city council under any obligation to approve a plat in your state? If not, then they can simply say 'no' to the developer.

    Mike

  2. #27
    BANNED
    Registered
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama
    Posts
    194

    Fundamentals

    Quote Originally posted by hilldweller View post
    Aren't you aware of the fact that a number of states (including FL) struck down or severely weakened eminent domain enabling statutes as a backlash to the Kelo decision? Do you think E.D. represented the "will of the people" in New London or in other examples where it was abused? Does it represent the "will of the people" for any reason other than because some politicians say it does?
    I am aware of Traditions that have made the Law of no effect. The Power of Eminent Domain was "reserved to the States or to the People"; if the States do not use it then the People can - that refers us back to the U.S. Constitution and to the U.S. Code which also calls for orderly and systematic, streamlined planning as a matter of Urban Policy and Community Development. We need to plead the fundamentals on which our Country was founded. Our efforts must not be cooercive or violent; Alabama’s Planning Code still allows this; it is still a Dillon’s Rule State; in other States, Planners can plead the Supreme Law of the Land, viz., the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Code. Please find details about that policy on my website if you wish to pursue this point.

    I would say what was done in New London, Connecticut was the result of those Traditions that have made the Law of no effect. The Supreme Court Decision was based on Tradition or “Case Law” (Stare Decisis) rather than Fundamental Law because the Plaintiff did not adequately present the Case to that fundamental point.

    10th Amendment - http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/html/amdt10.html

    9th Amendment - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_A...s_Constitution

    Search - http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=...fp-t-468&x=wrt


    Quote Originally posted by NHPlanner View post
    ...
    In the NH State Code noted above...I see loop holes that make it confusing - I would concentrate on the first line, to “make and adopt a Master Plan”.

  3. #28
    Cyburbian hilldweller's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Land of Confusion
    Posts
    3,736
    Quote Originally posted by bud View post
    I am aware of Traditions that have made the Law of no effect.
    Traditions? I was referring to laws enacted by the states that have restricted the use of eminent domain. States have exercised these powers through the powers reserved to them by the Constitution.

    Speaking of traditions, don't you think that the tradition of private property rights is reflected in the Constitution? I don't believe that it is in any way opposition to the intent of the Founding Fathers.

    Quote Originally posted by bud View post
    The Power of Eminent Domain was "reserved to the States or to the People"; if the States do not use it then the People can - that refers us back to the U.S. Constitution and to the U.S. Code which also calls for orderly and systematic, streamlined planning as a matter of Urban Policy and Community Development. We need to plead the fundamentals on which our Country was founded.
    This country was founded on many fundamentals, some of which may seem to be in conflict. If anything, I'd argue that the Framers sought to balance competing ideals as much as possible, maybe even with respect to planning vs. private property rights.

    I don't see how the Constitution supports state planning principles. The Constitution recognized that planning and community development were matters best left to local governments. The Founders put their faith in the people to handle these issues, and I don't think they were concerned that the results wouldn't be "orderly and systematic". Their experience with urbanism would have left them with little reason to worry about this.

  4. #29
    BANNED
    Registered
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama
    Posts
    194

    Commerce and Industry

    Quote Originally posted by hilldweller View post
    .

    Well, the Traditions I had in mind were those that allow Commerce to be regulated by Local government. That has perpetuated the Feudal System and is why the use of Eminent Domain has been misused. The reason Commerce was delegated to the Central Government is explained by A. Hamilton in Federalist Paper #17.

    In the Laissez Faire economics of the American Revolution, Land was to be held in Common rather than as Private Property which is derived from Labor and Capital - it may seem paradoxical but that system would actually secure the right to private use and facilitate good planning. See SVT in my signature below - http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showp...6&postcount=32 .

    Our Central Federal System of Government serves to protect and secure the rights of Individual Citizens; we are the true Sovereigns; The Feudal System as much as the Monarchy sought to make slaves of us. The People can go to the Federal government for protection, now. I refer to the Traditions that have obscured that.
    Last edited by bud; 16 May 2007 at 2:06 PM. Reason: clarify

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 9
    Last post: 17 Jun 2013, 4:52 PM
  2. Preemptive clubbbbbbe-ing for dandy
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 19
    Last post: 25 Mar 2012, 8:13 AM
  3. Replies: 25
    Last post: 15 Mar 2012, 12:20 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last post: 04 Nov 2007, 12:06 PM
  5. Street width - residential subdivision
    Transportation Planning
    Replies: 28
    Last post: 17 Jan 2007, 9:38 AM