1981
DOI: 10.2307/3311810
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Deregulating Land Use: An Alternative Free Enterprise Development System

Abstract: Both federal and state courts have applied a fairly liberal standing analysis, allowing developers to maintain a suit against restrictive zoning ordinances and outcomes. See, e.g., Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Hous. Dev. Corp., 429 U.S. 252, 260-64 (1977) (granting developers standing to represent their own interests, but leaving unresolved the question whether developers have standing to represent potential tenants); Home Builders League v. Township of Berlin, 81 NJ. 127, 131-35, 405 A.2d 381,… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, imposed corrections for market externalities, like regulation, carry the traditional risk of creating more inefficiencies than the remedy solves (Jr., 1987;Nelson, 1989). Land use regulation which restricts use of private property may reduce private land use efficiency to a greater extent than any realized gains from negative externality reductions (Ellickson, 1973;Siegan, 1977;Nelson, 1980;Fischel, 1987;Kmiec, 1981). Early alternative proposals, described by Ottensmann (1998), range from private contracts (Nelson, 1980), sellable zoning entitlements (Fischel, 1987), or nuisance laws (Siegan, 1977).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, imposed corrections for market externalities, like regulation, carry the traditional risk of creating more inefficiencies than the remedy solves (Jr., 1987;Nelson, 1989). Land use regulation which restricts use of private property may reduce private land use efficiency to a greater extent than any realized gains from negative externality reductions (Ellickson, 1973;Siegan, 1977;Nelson, 1980;Fischel, 1987;Kmiec, 1981). Early alternative proposals, described by Ottensmann (1998), range from private contracts (Nelson, 1980), sellable zoning entitlements (Fischel, 1987), or nuisance laws (Siegan, 1977).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Tragedy is also used to indicate market failure from the neoliberal perspective. Kmiec (1981) proposes the deregulation of land uses in the USA, contending that zoning and subdivision controls should be eliminated and replaced by a free enterprise development system allowing private decisions to determine the desired type, location and design of land development. However, Kmiec cited the Tragedy not to support privatization but to denote that some form of public control is necessary in order to avoid the tragedy.…”
Section: The ‘Tragedy’ In Planning Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, there is also a strong academic and philosophical literature which makes the case that while private zoning is fully compatible with deontological rights and utilitarian practicality, the public version thereof is highly problematic. For example, see Albin (2010), Benson (1981); Block (1980Block ( , 1981aBlock ( , 1981bBlock ( , 2014a; Camplin (2010); Fedako (2006Fedako ( , 2019; Friday (2018aFriday ( , 2018b; Hollenbeck (2013), Hornberger (2018); Kmiec (1981), McMaken (2017); Navabi (2019), Nino (2018); O'Neill (2009); Siegan (1970and Terrell (2000).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%