Full Issue PDF, Volume 66, Issue 5

{"title":"Full Issue PDF, Volume 66, Issue 5","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/15480755.2014.916163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AmericAn PlAnning AssociAtion 3 Many in the development community look for certainty. Certainty that the law won’t change dramatically and certainty that a single election won’t derail their plans. On the whole, regulators do their best to assure that consistency. But what if it’s a changing climate that’s certain? Sea levels are rising, storms are intensifying, and the impact of coastal development on inland residents is increasing. How should regulation adjust to these involuntary changes? In 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission precluded most bans on coastal development subject to “background principles of ” state law, and one of those principles is the power to protect public health. This month’s first commentary author, University of Utah law professor Robin Kundis Craig, explains why Lucas doesn’t prevent states and municipalities from responding to climate change and its impacts on public health. And what are those impacts? Doctor and public health researcher Cindy L. Parker of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health warns of the dangers to public health posed by sea-level rise, climate change, and growing storms. Together, these authors present the planning tools to put in place resilient physical and service infrastructure and the legal tools to defend them from a takings claim.","PeriodicalId":41184,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","volume":"6 1","pages":"24 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2014-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Property Planning and Environmental Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15480755.2014.916163","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

AmericAn PlAnning AssociAtion 3 Many in the development community look for certainty. Certainty that the law won’t change dramatically and certainty that a single election won’t derail their plans. On the whole, regulators do their best to assure that consistency. But what if it’s a changing climate that’s certain? Sea levels are rising, storms are intensifying, and the impact of coastal development on inland residents is increasing. How should regulation adjust to these involuntary changes? In 1992, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Commission precluded most bans on coastal development subject to “background principles of ” state law, and one of those principles is the power to protect public health. This month’s first commentary author, University of Utah law professor Robin Kundis Craig, explains why Lucas doesn’t prevent states and municipalities from responding to climate change and its impacts on public health. And what are those impacts? Doctor and public health researcher Cindy L. Parker of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health warns of the dangers to public health posed by sea-level rise, climate change, and growing storms. Together, these authors present the planning tools to put in place resilient physical and service infrastructure and the legal tools to defend them from a takings claim.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
全文PDF,第66卷,第5期
发展界的许多人都在寻求确定性。可以肯定的是,法律不会发生重大变化,而且可以肯定的是,一次选举不会破坏他们的计划。总的来说,监管机构尽最大努力确保这种一致性。但如果气候变化是确定无疑的呢?海平面上升,风暴加剧,沿海发展对内陆居民的影响越来越大。监管机构应该如何适应这些非自愿的变化?1992年,美国最高法院在卢卡斯诉南卡罗来纳海岸委员会一案中,根据州法律的“背景原则”,排除了大多数沿海开发禁令,而这些原则之一就是保护公众健康的权力。本月的第一位评论作者,犹他大学法学教授罗宾·昆迪斯·克雷格,解释了为什么卢卡斯没有阻止各州和市政当局应对气候变化及其对公众健康的影响。这些影响是什么?约翰霍普金斯大学布隆伯格公共卫生学院的医生和公共卫生研究员辛迪·l·帕克警告说,海平面上升、气候变化和风暴增加对公众健康构成了危险。这些作者共同提出了规划工具,以建立有弹性的物理和服务基础设施,以及法律工具,以保护他们免受征收索赔。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊最新文献
The absurdity of the modern law of town and village greens Legal framework of sustainable construction procurement to prevent land degradation: comparison between Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand Can community land trust models work in Peru? Researching community-based land tenure models for affordable housing “From the lease’s point of view”: the role of tied leases in shaping the UK pub sector Redeveloping the compact city: the challenges of strata collective sales
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1