The Georgia Supreme Court recently seemed to endorse the idea that sidewalks are necessary to promote the health and safety of residents. Well, kind of. At the very least, the Court’s ruling highlights the necessity of adopting urban planning policies that are focused less on cars and more on the well-being of residents.
What happens when your neighbor claims they own part of your property and threatens to evict you? Well the gang in It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia found themselves in just such a situation. Adverse Possession law offers a better, and legal, alternative to how the gang handled their situation.
This is an important question since structures built under the auspices of an old zoning code that are now excluded from the current zoning code are at odds with the updated vision for the community. This may not be a big deal when, say, a house is constructed a year after an area is rezoned for commercial use. However, it becomes increasingly problematic when that house is now a power plant and the one year has increased to ten. This ability to develop based on a 10 year old zoning code creates uncertainty for potential residents and developers who may find the nonconforming development to be an undesirable neighbor.
Mosques are all the rage right now down in Newton County, Georgia. In order to prevent the county from being overrun by mosques the Newton County Board of Commissioners placed a moratorium on the construction of all new places of worship. They had no choice; without a moratorium the county faced the risk of being consumed by mosques. Not really, though. What’s actually happening is that one organization purchased a piece of land in Newton County with the intention of building a mosque and, in response, the county issued a temporary moratorium on the construction of all new places of worship.
Removing zoning to a larger regional authority would undoubtedly be met with fierce political opposition, though it’s likely just what the doctor ordered for many metro areas to grow in more organized and reasonable manners. Making counties and cities compete among each other when we all freely travel between jurisdictions on a daily basis makes little sense. The bureaucratic inconsistencies and infrastructural headaches that ensue degrade our comprehensive regional planning efforts while cultivating a fractured political atmosphere and an overall distrust of one another.
Dictating what people can and can’t do with their property is perhaps one of the most controversial forms of regulation, particularly at the local level. Most generally agree that factories should not be located next to schools, but once we go beyond the more obvious incompatible uses the topic can become quite heated. Throw in the touchy subject of adult entertainment and the debate escalates to new levels.
When Land Use Codes Attack: How a 1970’s Ordinance is Challenging the Supreme Court to Define The Property A Government Can Take
The waters of the St. Croix River serve as the boundary between Minnesota and Wisconsin for 125 miles prior to emptying into the Mississippi River just south of Minneapolis and eventually the Gulf […]
Support for environmental protection through land use regulation can be peculiar. On the national stage, the fervor over placing any type of regulation on how one can use his or her land […]
This is re-post of an article originally titled “Local Theatre Groups Need a Zoning Change” posted on June 15, 2013. A recent story by the Washington, DC blog Greater Greater Washington highlighted […]
By Jennifer Grimes Urban beekeeping provides sanctuary for bees and a source of pleasure and potential income for their caretakers. Studies show that city bees may produce more honey, enjoy greater food source […]