Defining “blight”

[H]

Anyone have any good (official) language defining “blight”?

[Richmond Jake]

The now defunct California redevelopment agency legislation had a definition....I think. Sorry, I don't have a link. But look at the APA-CAL Section web site. They have links.

[H]

what happened to the FLA def RJ? I looked in the statutes, but could not find...

[Cardinal]

You want to be very careful in how you define this. I would reference a definition in a state statute, if at all possible. If not, look at how it is defined at the federal level. Disputes about "blight" often involve legal challenges. Adopting a recognized definition is going to provide some safe cover for the municipality if it has to defend its actions or decisions.

[Pragmatic Idealist]

I wish everyone would retire that word and use the term, "visual pollution", instead.

[Cardinal]

I wish everyone would retire that word and use the term, "visual pollution", instead.

And that is why you want to be careful in defining the term. Blight can have meaning beyond simply looking bad - and it should when "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". The legal definitions of blight usually put the emphasis on function, such as obsolescence, structural quality, safety, inadequate infrastructure, platting, etc.

[Huck]

The now defunct California redevelopment agency legislation had a definition....I think. Sorry, I don't have a link. But look at the APA-CAL Section web site. They have links.

Under the current blight definition, a blighted area is one that is predominantly
urbanized and in which the following four components are met:
1. The combination of statutorily enumerated conditions (which contribute to
blight) are prevalent and substantial.
2. The above conditions are the cause of a reduction or lack of proper utilization
of an area.
3. The area constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community.
4. That burden cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed by private and/or
governmental action, without redevelopment.
Blight must be prevalent and substantial in the project area, not merely character
istic of the project area...

[ColoGI]

Under the current blight definition, a blighted area is one that is predominantly
urbanized and in which the following four components are met:
1. The combination of statutorily enumerated conditions (which contribute to
blight) are prevalent and substantial.
2. The above conditions are the cause of a reduction or lack of proper utilization
of an area.
3. The area constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community.
4. That burden cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed by private and/or
governmental action, without redevelopment.
Blight must be prevalent and substantial in the project area, not merely character
istic of the project area...

That sort of definition is how pols game the system for their buddies-benefactors-sponsors.

[Huck]

That sort of definition is how pols game the system for their buddies-benefactors-sponsors.

Yup. A lot of subjectivity. "This block of homes doesn't properly utilize the land. It would be much better served by a strip mall." That's essentially how downtown San Diego was redeveloped. As well as some areas of Southeast San Diego.