The Court established the right of municipalities to regulate
building height. correct answer: Welch v. Swasey; 214 U.S. 91
(1909)
The Court first approved the use of setback regulations, although
it overturned the setbacks in this case. correct answer: Eubank
v. City of Richmond; U.S. Supreme Court (1912)
The Court first approved the regulation of the location of land
uses. correct answer: Hadacheck v. Sebastian; U.S. Supreme
Court (1915)
The Court found that as long as the community believed that
there was a threat of a nuisance, the zoning ordinance should be
upheld. The court first upheld modern zoning as a proper use of
police power. Alfred Bettman filed an influential brief with the
court. correct answer: Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.;
U.S. Supreme Court (1926)
The Court used a rational basis test to strike down a zoning
ordinance because it had no valid public purpose (e.g., to
promote the health, safety, morals, or welfare of the public).
correct answer: Nectow v. City of Cambridge; U.S. Supreme
Court (1928)
The court upheld a growth management system that awarded
points to development proposals based on the availability of
public utilities, drainage facilities, parks, road access, and
firehouses. A proposal would only be approved upon reaching a
certain point level. Developers could increase their point total by
providing the involved facilities themselves. correct answer:
Golden v. Planning Board of the Town of Ramapo; New York
State Court of Appeals (1972)
the Court upheld quotas on the annual number of building
permits issued. correct answer: Construction Industry of
Sonoma County v. City of Petaluma; U.S. Court of Appeals for
the 4th Circuit (1975)
The Court upheld temporary moratoriums on building permits.
correct answer: Associated Home Builders of Greater East Bay
v. City of Livermore; California Supreme Court (1976)
The Court held that the EPA must provide a reasonable
justification for why they would not regulate greenhouse gases.
correct answer: Massachusetts v. EPA, Inc.; U.S. Supreme
Court (2006)
The Court found that the Army Corp of Engineers must
determine whether there is a significant nexus between a
wetland and a navigable waterway. correct answer: Rapanos v.
United States; U.S. Supreme Court (2006)
The Court found that hydroelectric dams are subject to Section
401 of the Clean Water Act. correct answer: SD Warren v.
Maine Board of Environmental Protection; U.S. Supreme Court
(2006)
In this case the Supreme Court was asked to evaluate whether
disparate impact is the appropriate standard in which to evaluate
the impact of the Fair Housing Act. Inclusive Communities
Project claimed that the Texas Department of Housing and
Community Affairs was disproportionately granting tax credits
to developments in minority neighborhoods and denying credits
to developments within Caucasian neighborhoods. The Court
held that Disparate impact is the appropriate standard to be
applied to the Fair Housing Act. The result is that policies that
even inadvertently relegate minorities to poor areas violates the
Fair Housing Act. correct answer: Texas Department of
Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities
Project Inc.; US Supreme Court (2015)
The Court upheld a zoning scheme that decentralized sexually
oriented businesses in Detroit. correct answer: Young v.
American Mini Theaters, Inc.; U.S. Supreme Court (1976)
The Court found that commercial and non-commercial speech
cannot be treated differently. The court overruled an ordinance
that banned all off-premises signs because it effectively banned
non-commercial signs. correct answer: Metromedia, Inc. v. City
of San Diego; U.S. Supreme Court (1981)
The Court found that the regulation of signs was valid for
aesthetic reasons as long as the ordinance does not regulate the
content of the sign. If the regulation is based on sign content, it
must be justified by a compelling governmental interest.