11.367 THE LAW AND POLITICS OF LAND USE Spring Semester 2017 … · · 2017-02-03on this...
Transcript of 11.367 THE LAW AND POLITICS OF LAND USE Spring Semester 2017 … · · 2017-02-03on this...
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 1 of 15
11.367 THE LAW AND POLITICS OF LAND USE Spring Semester 2017
Tuesday - Thursday
2:30 - 4:00 p.m.
Room 10-401
Terry Szold, Adjunct Professor of Land Use Planning
COURSE OUTLINE AND SYLLABUS
This course focuses on local and state power to regulate land use and development.
There is particular emphasis on the tools most frequently used by planners and
communities, including zoning. The legal framework and foundation for zoning and the
evolution of land use regulations are given considerable attention. Development
decisions rendered by public agencies are reviewed, critiqued, and discussed in relation to
the constitutional and other issues that are explored.
Given the perceived narrowing of the relationship between public improvements
requirements and development impact, the course provides students with an opportunity
to learn and become more skilled in crafting legally defensible regulations and programs.
Supreme Court cases and decisions such as Nollan, Lucas, Dolan, Koontz, Kelo, and
Tahoe-Sierra are examined. The potential lessons and prescriptions from these cases and
decisions are discussed and analyzed.
While this course is focused on the foundation for land use regulation and evolving
regulatory standards, it is not a subject that emphasizes the complex mechanics of the
judicial system or litigation strategies. Rather, it is a course designed for the generalist
planner. Students are exposed to the land use and regulatory issues that they may face in
their future work endeavors, and the potential legal challenges that may result from the
implementation of the various programs that they develop or administer.
Course materials and readings are drawn from land use law literature, a textbook, journal
articles, and relevant publications. Legal cases and decisions rendered by regulatory
agencies are also used. Where relevant to specific topics, local land use lawyers and
planners join as guest lecturers, and will participate in selected class discussions and as
“judges” for the student workshop at the end of the semester.
Student evaluations are based on completion of a final examination (30%), class
participation (25%), two short papers (25%), and workshop participation (20%).
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 2 of 15
Academic Integrity For information on MIT’s rules on academic integrity, also applicable to this class, please
go to the MIT Website: http://web.mit.edu/academicintegrity.
Students with Disabilities
This class follows the MIT rules on the accommodation for students with disabilities,
details for which are at: http://mit.edu/uaap/sds/students/
Instructor Office Hours By appointment (generally Tuesday and Thursday, after class)
Below, readings for each class are listed under each subject category for the class dates
provided. See the section “Assigned & Optional Readings” at the end of this course
outline/syllabus for more detail. (page 14)
Where the symbol appears, the reading is posted under “Materials” on the
Stellar/Learning Modules web site for the class. (Please note that additional materials not
listed here are also posted on the Stellar site, not to be covered in class, but which may be
of interest to you during the semester.
Where the symbol () appears, these are suggested additional readings that are optional;
You may wish to peruse or skim these for general content, if time permits, or if greater
exploration of the subject is desired.
I. THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND FOUNDATION
FOR LAND USE CONTROLS
Feb. 7th
• Course Introduction: Land Use Controls and the Legal Framework
(To be led by instructor, no assigned readings.)
Feb. 4th
• History of Land Use Controls; Nuisance Law and Police Power
Kerr, Orin S., “How to Read a Legal Opinion: A Guide for New Law Students,”
The Green Bag: An Entertaining Journal of Law, 2007.
Cases Reviewed: Bove v. Donner-Hanna Coke Corp.
Spur Industries, Inc. v. Del E. Webb Development Co.
Reading Assignment: Mandelker, et al., Planning and Control of Land Development,
Ninth Edition, 2016, (Henceforth referred to as “PCLD”), pages 1-26; 67-81. As noted
previously, starred cases/documents in this document mean they are on Stellar.
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 3 of 15
Feb. 14th
• The Takings Issue: Kelo and the “Zoning Classics”
Cases Reviewed: Hadacheck v. Sebastian Kelo v. City of New London (Full U.S. Supreme Court decision and various other extra materials
on this case/topic also posted on Stellar for those interested.)
Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Mahon
Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 82-124.
Additional required reading:
“Condemnation Nation: The big business of eminent domain,” Joshua Kurlantzick,
Harpers, October, 2005.
Optional:
See also these newer cases on the topic, posted or linked to from the Stellar site: County of Hawaii v. C&J Coupe Family (summary only)
Goldstein v. N.Y. State Urban Development Corp.
Rhode Island Economic Development Co. v. The Parking Co..
Also worth a review is the summary on Stellar of Arizona’s Prop 207, and these readings:
“Village of Euclid v. Ambler: The Bettman Amicus Brief,” Planning &
Environmental Law, March 2006.
“Eminent Domain for Private Gain? The Kelo v. City of New London Decision and
Aftermath,” Brian W. Blaesser, Planning & Environmental Law, September 2005.
Tamulevich, Susan, “New London Readies for Its Close-Up,” Planning, April 2013.
Silver, Christopher, “The Racial Origins of Zoning,” pages 23-42. In Thomas, June
Manning, and Marsha Ritzdorf, eds., Urban Planning and the African American
Community: In the Shadows, Sage Publications, 1997.
Feb. 16th
• The Takings Issue - Continued
Cases Reviewed: Penn. Central Transportation Co. v. New York
Nollan v. California Coastal Commission
Dolan v. City of Tigard
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 127-172.
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 4 of 15
Feb. 21st (No class; Monday schedule of classes held due to President's Day)
Feb. 23rd (1st Written Assignment Distributed and Discussed)
• Per Se and Temporary Takings; Applying the Penn Central Test
Cases Reviewed: First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los Angeles
Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council
Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
Lingle v. Chevron
Koontz v. St. Johns River Management District
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 172-251. Skim Notes pages.
Optional:
Kayden, Jerold S., “Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional
Planning Agency: About More Than Moratoria,” in Land Use Law & Zoning Digest,
Vol.54, No.10, October 2002, pages 3-5. (If interested, see additional articles on the case
under “Additional Resources” on the Stellar site.)
“Deconstructing Lingle: Implications for Takings Doctrine,” The John Marshall Law
Review, Winter 2007.
Zasloff, Jonathan, “Koontz and Exactions: Don’t Worry, Be Happy,” Legal Planet,
Berkley Law/UCLA Law,” June, 2013.
Echiverria, John D., “A Legal Blow to Sustainable Development,” The New York
Times, June 26, 2013.
Feb. 28th
Due Process and Equal Protection Limitations; Remedies for Violations;
Barriers to Judicial Relief and Ripeness; Abstention
Cases Reviewed: George Washington University v. District of Columbia
Village of Willowbrook v. Olech
Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City
Nectow v. City of Cambridge (A local case! See coverage in textbook, pages 124-127; but also
case itself on Stellar.)
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 251-294.
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 5 of 15
II. ZONING AS THE PRINCIPAL TOOL OF CONTROL OF LAND USE
March 2nd
• Zoning Enabling Acts and Ordinances; How a Zoning Case Gets to Court;
Standing; Exhaustion of Remedies; Securing Judicial Review; Presumption of
Validity
Cases Reviewed: Center Bay Gardens, LLC v. City of Tempe City Council
Ben Lomond, Inc. v. Municipality of Anchorage
Copple v. City of Lincoln
City of Richmond v. Randall
Krause v. City of Royal Oak
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 295-347.
Instructor presentation: “Zoning Basics”
March 7th
Density and Intensity of Use Restrictions; Site Development Requirements;
Residential Districts, Accessory Dwellings and Definitions of Family
Cases Reviewed: Jaylin Investments v. Village of Moreland Hills
Johnson v. Town of Edgartown
Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center
Keinath v. Township of Edgmont
City of Wilmington v. Hill
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 349-358; 370-406. Also read or skim starred cases
noted.
Hirt, Sonia, “Home, Sweet Home: American Residential Zoning in Comparative
Perspective,” Journal of Planning Education and Research, Fall 2013.
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 6 of 15
March 9th (1st Written Assignment Due)
Commercial and Industrial Uses; Nonconforming Uses
Cases Reviewed: BP America Inc. v. Council of the City of Avon
Loreto Development Co. Inc. v. Village of Chardon
Hernandez v. City of Hanford
Conforti v. City of Manchester
City of Los Angeles v. Gage
Island Silver & Spice v. Islamorada
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 407-463. Also read starred case noted.
Peruse various municipal Zoning Ordinances and Bylaws online.
March 14th
• The Role of Zoning Change; The Zoning Variance, Special Use Permits, and Site
Plan Review
Cases Reviewed: Puritan-Greenfield Improvement Association v. Leo
Simplex Technologies, Inc. v. Town of Newington
One Meridian Partners, LLP v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of City of Philadelphia Ziervogel v. Washington County Board of Adjustment
Fairfield County v. Southland Corp.
Crooked Creek Conservation and Gun Club v. Hamilton County North Board of Appeals
Charisma Holding Corp. v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Lewisboro
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 695-705; 718-751; 818-824. Also read starred cases
noted.
March 16th
The Zoning Amendment: Vested Rights, Spot Zoning, Quasi-Judicial Versus
Legislative Rezoning
Cases Reviewed: Western Land Equities, Inc. v. City of Logan
Kuehne v. Town of East Hartford
Board of County Commissioners of Brevard County v. Snyder
Thomas Bransford and Others v. Edgartown Board of Zoning Appeals (read both the SJC and
Land Court decisions.)
Bjorklund & another v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Norwell
Amicus Brief for the Massachusetts Chapter of APA in the Bjorklund SJC case
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 751-795. Also read starred cases noted above.
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 7 of 15
Blanton, Kimberly: “Top Court Backs Town in Curbing McMansions,”
The Boston Globe, January 8, 2008.
Szold, Terry S., “Mansionization and Its Discontents,”
Journal of the American Planning Association, Spring 2005.
March 21st (2nd Written Assignment Distributed and Discussed)
• Downzoning; The Role of the Comprehensive Plan; Initiative and Referendum;
SLAPP Suits
Cases Reviewed: National Amusements, Inc. v. City of Boston
Stone v. City of Wilton
Haines v. City of Phoenix
Township of Sparta v. Spillane
City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, Inc.
Tri-County Concrete Company v. Uffman-Kirsch
Trail v. Terrapin Run
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 795-803; 825-871. Also read or skim starred cases.
Also see: Hall, E. Richard and Shelley B. Wasserman, “Terrapin Run a Year Later,”
Planning & Environmental Law, September 2009.
Guest Speaker: Joel Bard, Land Use and Municipal Law Attorney, and Partner from
Kopelman and Paige, will join the discussion, and talk about a downzoning in the
Agassiz Neighborhood in North Cambridge, Massachusetts.
March 23rd
• Flexible Zoning and Zoning Innovations: Floating Zones, Contract and
Conditional Zoning, Incentive Zoning, Special Districts, Performance and
Overlay Zoning
Cases Reviewed: Collard v. Incorporated Village of Flower Hill
Rando v. Town of North Attleborough Durand v. Bellingham Susan C. Campion et al. v. Board of Aldermen of the City of New Haven
Campion et al. v. Board of Aldermen of the City of New Haven (CT Supreme Court decision)
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 803-818. Also read starred cases noted above.
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 8 of 15
Also see:
Burlington Planned Development District Bylaw
Providence Rhode Island Institutional Floating Zoning Regulations
Del Monte Dunes at Monterey Ltd. v. City of Monterey (For this case, see
summary/article by Eagle, “Del Monte Dunes, Good Faith, and Land Use Regulation”)
April 4th (2nd Written Assignment Due)
Uses Entitled to Special Protection: Free Speech-Protected Uses and Religious
Uses; Telecommunications Uses
Cases Reviewed: City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, Inc.
Chabad Lubavitch of Litchfield County v. Borough of Litchfield
Omnipoint Communications MB Operations, LLC, v. Town of Lincoln
Reaching Hearts Int’l Inc. v. Prince George’s County
Centro v. City of Yuma
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 463-502. Also read starred cases noted.
Guest Speaker: Michael Giaimo, a DUSP alumni and Partner with the law firm Robinson
and Cole, will speak about his work on cases related to the religious use question.
III. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS AND EQUITY ISSUES:
EXCLUSIONARY ZONING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, EXACTIONS,
AND IMPACT FEES
April 6th
• Exclusionary Zoning and The Mount Laurel Doctrine; Discriminatory Zoning
Cases Reviewed: Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Township of Mt. Laurel (I &II)
City of Cuyahoga Falls v. Buckeye Community Hope Foundation
Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.
Huntington Branch, NAACP v. Town of Huntington
Larkin v. State of Michigan Department of Social Services
Innovative Health Systems (HIS) Inc. v. City of White Plains
Budnik v. Town of Carefree
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 595-621; 654-694. Also read/skim starred cases, and
amicus brief on Stellar for City of Miami v. Bank of America / Wells Fargo (see note
below).
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 9 of 15
Ritzdorf, Marsha, “Locked Out of Paradise: Contemporary Exclusionary Zoning, the
Supreme Court, and African Americans, 1970 to the Present,” pages 43-57. In Thomas,
June Manning, and Marsha Ritzdorf, eds., Urban Planning and the African
American Community: In the Shadows, Sage Publications, 1997.
Szold, Terry S., “What Difference Has the ADA Made?”, Planning, April 2002.
Guest Speaker: Professor Justin Steil of DUSP will join us for a discussion of the
exclusionary zoning topic, including the amicus brief he contributed to for a current
Supreme Court case (City of Miami v. Bank of America / Wells Fargo).
April 11th
Inclusionary Zoning and State Affordable Housing Legislation
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 622-653.
Also see on Stellar: Palmer/Sixth Street v. City of Los Angeles
MGL Chapter 40B: The Massachusetts “Anti-Snob Zoning Act” (should read summary
of 40B regulations)
“The Inclusionary Housing Debate: Who Really Pays for Affordable Housing?”,
Brian W. Blaesser and Janet R. Stearns, NAR, 2004.
Inclusionary Zoning: The California Experience, National Housing Conference, Vol.
3, No. 1, 2004.
Inclusionary Zoning: Lessons Learned in Massachusetts, NHC Affordable Housing
Policy Review, Volume 2, Issue 1, National Housing Conference January 2002.
Conduct your own online search for inclusionary zoning ordinance provisions of the City
of Cambridge and the Town of Brookline.
Guest Speaker: Clark Ziegler, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Housing
Partnership, will join the class to discuss inclusionary zoning provisions and the best
ways to remove barriers to affordable housing.
April 13th
• Subdivision Regulations; Private Covenants and Restrictions;
Planned Unit Developments
Cases Reviewed: Garipy v. Town of Hanover
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 10 of 15
Baker v. Planning Board
Sinkler v. County of Charleston
Cheney v. Village 2 at New Hope, Inc.
(While not a major focus of the course, students should have some knowledge about
subdivision regulations and the use of private land use controls that are recorded with
subdivision plans.)
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 873-902; 929-954.
Also skim the Gilroy and Royal Oak PUD Ordinances on class Stellar site.
(See also Szold, Terry, “Planned Unit Development”, in Planning and Urban Design
Standards, APA/John Wiley and Sons.)
April 18th Holiday (Patriots’ Day Observed)
April 20th
• Dedications, Exactions, Linkage, and Impact Fees
Cases Reviewed: Sparks v. Douglas County
Home Builders Ass’n of Dayton & the Miami Valley v. Beavercreek
Erlich v. City of Culver City
Barberry Homes v. Rodenheiser (Another local case)
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 902-929. If necessary, review Nollan and Dolan in
Chapter 2. Read starred cases noted.
Also if interested:
“Policy Guide on Impact Fees,” American Planning Association, April, 1997.
IV. GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND ALTERNATE URBAN
DEVELOPMENT FORMS
April 25th
• Introduction to Growth Management; Moratoria and Interim Controls; Quota
Programs; Timing, Phasing, Rates of Development
Cases Reviewed: Ecogen, LLC v. Town of Italy
Construction Industry Ass’n of Sonoma County v. City of Petaluma
Zuckerman v. Town of Hadley
Golden v. Ramapo Planning Board
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 11 of 15
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island
Monks v. City of Rancho Palos Verde
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 705-717; 955-984. Also read or skim starred cases
noted.
Guest Speaker: Attorney Diane Tillotson, a Partner at Hemenway and Barnes, will join
the class for discussion of a legal challenge to a growth control regulation in Hadley,
Massachusetts.
April 27st
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances, Concurrency, LEED-ND, Urban Growth
Boundaries; Controlling Growth through Public Services and Corridor
Preservation; Takings Legislation; State Programs for Controlling Growth
Cases Reviewed: Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission v. Rosenberg
Hildebrand v. City of Adair Village
Dateline Builders, Inc. v. City of Santa Rosa
Citrus County v. Halls River Dev. Inc.
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 984-1033. Also read starred case noted.
And browse on Stellar:
State of Oregon’s growth management tools, Measure 37 and Measure 49.
Daniels, Katherine H. and Edward J. Sullivan, “Oregon’s 40-Year-Old Innovation,”
Planning, February 2013.
May 2nd
Mixed Use Development, Transit-Oriented Development, New Urbanism, Neo-
Traditional Development, and Form-Based (and Smart) Codes; Preserving
Agricultural Land
Cases Reviewed: Gardner v. New Jersey Pinelands Commission
Building Industry Ass’n of Central California v. County of Stanislaus
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 503-515; 358-370; 577-593.
Also consider:
“The Local Arena: Changing Regulations and Standards to Address Sprawl,”
by T. Szold in Urban Sprawl: A Comprehensive Reference Guide, David Soule, ed.,
Greenwood Press, 2006, pages 377-393.
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 12 of 15
For students interested, consider looking at the Conference for New Urbanism web site:
www.cnu.org, and also the related Model Codes list, both linked to on Stellar.
Also, the following two chapters from the book referenced below:
Blaesser, Brian W., “Smart Growth: Legal Assumptions and Market Realities,”
and Kayden, Jerold S., “The Constitution Neither Prohibits nor Requires Smart
Growth,” in Szold and Carbonell, eds., Smart Growth: Form and Consequences,
Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2002.
V. AESTHETICS AND THE REGULATION OF DESIGN
May 4th
• Design Controls, Aesthetics, Urban Design, Design Review; Historic
Preservation including Transfer of Development Rights
Cases Reviewed (to be determined; not all will be assigned): Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego (Cal.)
Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego (U.S. Supreme Ct.)
Showing Animals Respect and Kindness v. City of West Hollywood
Naser Jewelers, Inc. v, City of Concord
State ex rel. Stoyanoff v. Berkeley
Anderson v. City of Issaquah
Pinecrest Homeowners Assn v. Glen A. Cloninger and Assoc.
In re Pierce Subdivision Application
Figarsky v. Historic District Commission
Fred F. French Investing Co. v. City of New York
Friends of the Great Southern v. City of Hollywood
Gibbons v. Historic District Commission of the Town of Fairfield
Casey v. Mayor and City Council of Rockville
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 1033-1121. Case notes and questions may be
skimmed. Starred cases above on Stellar.
Also skim on Stellar: “Transfer of Development Rights Turns 40” by Rick and Erica
Pruetz, Planning & Environmental Law, June 2007 Vol. 59, No. 6, and the Design
Guidelines of Austin, TX and Raleigh, NC.
(The APA National Conference will take place in New York City, May 6 – May 9.
Students going to the conference are urged to attend sessions on land use law and growth
management.)
Final Workshop Assignment Distributed and Discussed on 5/4
“Critiquing a Local Land Use Decision and Crafting Defensible Decisions”
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 13 of 15
May 9th
(Workshop Period/Team Meetings)
May 11th
• Reviewing and Judging the Workshop Team Assignment and Results
Teams present and summarize their decisions before a small panel of “judges” who
are land use law practitioners. Team written reports are due the next day.
VI. ENVIRONMENTAL LAND USE CONTROLS
May 16th
• Wetlands, Floodplain Regulation, Groundwater and Watershed Protection,
Protecting Hillsides, Coastal Zone Management, Sustainability and Climate
Change; Alternative Energy Regulations
Cases Reviewed (to be determined; not all will be assigned): Palazzolo v. Rhode Island
Lopes v. Peabody (Mass SJC, Land Court, Damages)
FIC Homes of Blackstone, Inc. v. Conservation Commission of Blackstone
Rapanos v. U.S.
Suitum v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
Topliss v. Planning Commission (*see reading referenced below.)
Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. United States Army Corps of
Engineers (*see reading referenced below.)
Robinson Township, Washington County v. Pennsylvania
Muscarello v. Winnebago County Board
Reading Assignment: PCLD pages 517-577.
“Where’s Waldo: Finding Federal Wetlands after the Rapanos Decision,” Klein,
Michael S. et al., Zoning and Planning Law Report, Vol. 29, No. 8, September 2006.
“California’s Aerial Combat,” by Paul Shigley, in Planning, February 2009.
Also, for those interested
*The sections on the Topliss and SWANCC decisions from the 2003 edition of the PCLD,
Chapter 13 “Environmental Protection,” Mandelker et al., pages 706-715 and 722-730,
posted on Stellar.
Kusler, Jon, “The SWANCC Decision and State Regulations of Wetlands,”
Association of State Wetland Managers, (www.aswm.org), 2001.
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 14 of 15
VII. CLASS WRAP-UP AND SYNTHESIS
End of assigned readings.
May 18th
• Class Wrap-up/Synthesis
• Open Review and Question Period for Final Exam Preparation
Week of May 22nd
• Final Exam - Final Date and Exam Location to be Announced.
Assigned & Optional Readings
The main textbook that contains the majority of required readings for the course is:
Mandelker, Daniel R., et al., Planning and Control of Land Development: Cases and
Materials,* Ninth Edition, Carolina Academic Press, 2016.
(Referred to as “PCLD” throughout the syllabus.) * Also on reserve at Rotch Library.
The “Notes and Questions” that follow each of the cases or major sections of the text
may often be perused and skimmed for general content. However, there are often useful
areas of inquiry and interesting observations contained in these sections. The
“Problems” posed after discussion of various topics and cases are also worth
considering.
In addition, various other assigned and optional cases and articles are on the class Stellar
site, as noted throughout this Course Outline.
Helpful Resources
Daniel Mandelker’s web site is a companion and major course resource to the textbook.
The URL is: http://landuselaw.wustl.edu and includes case summaries, new cases, model
ordinances, representative ordinances relevant to course topics, case site maps, and
wonderful supplementary materials.
Recent United States Circuit Court cases are also available at:
www.uscourts.gov/links.html
Confused about a word, term, or definition in a case? See the on-line law dictionary at:
dictionary.law.com.
11.367 Course Syllabus (February 2017) 15 of 15
Other Recommended Readings
The journal and book listed below are also recommended for those students who
anticipate future involvement with land use law or regulatory matters, or those who wish
to explore current planning and land use law cases. Neither are required for the course.
The journal Planning and Environmental Law is available via the MIT Library and
contains many relevant and interesting articles related to the topics explored in this
course. The book is Blaesser, Brian W., Discretionary Land Use Controls: Avoiding
Invitations to Abuse Discretion, 2007, West Group.