Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (1970) ("URA") was passed by the U.S. federal government in 1970. It was intended to ensure fair compensation and assistance for those whose property was compulsorily acquired for public use under eminent domain law.
Some 360 property owners and 1,120 residents in 37 existing buildings, built from the pre-war years to the 1960s, have been affected. [28] [29] In the process the URA plans to also evict the oldest wet market in the city, founded 1841. [2] The plan was submitted to and approved by the Town Planning Board in early 2007.
Dec. 14—A decision by the North Bend Urban Renewal Agency to purchase property downtown to help bring a brewery to town has come under fire due to its impact on a different business next door.
Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26 (1954), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that interpreted the Takings Clause ("nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation") of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
The program's publicly stated purpose was the development and building of affordable housing, both rental and co-operatively owned, for middle-income residents. [ 4 ] [ 5 ] Under this program, local jurisdictions acquired property by eminent domain and provided it to developers to develop housing for low- and middle-income tenants.
This is an accepted version of this page This is the latest accepted revision, reviewed on 3 January 2025. Economic policy relating to housing markets Part of a series on Living spaces Main House: detached semi-detached terraced Apartment Bungalow Cottage Ecohouse Green home Housing project Human outpost I-house Ranch Tenement Condominium Mixed-use development Hotel Hostel Castle Public ...
The common law was harsh to tenants. Texas tenants leased their property "as is" under the common law doctrine of caveat emptor, Latin for "let the buyer beware." [30] The tenant was expected to carefully inspect the property before signing their lease. Afterwards, they were expected to continue paying rent even if the property became ...
The "polestar" of regulatory takings jurisprudence is Penn Central Transp. Co. v.New York City (1973). [3] In Penn Central, the Court denied a takings claim brought by the owner of Grand Central Terminal following refusal of the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission to approve plans for construction of 50-story office building over Grand Central Terminal.