Publication Date
12-4-2017
Document Type
Article
Organizational Units
Sturm College of Law
Keywords
Privately owned public open spaces, Exactions
Abstract
Some exactions are just bad. By this, I mean that they fail to mitigate the harms they were created to internalize. This struck me recently while I was researching privately owned public open spaces (POPOS), which are often exacted in exchange for a density bonus. Through my research, I determined that POPOS often fail to achieve the goals of good public space, in part because they are often exclusionary. I found myself wondering whether the citizens who were stuck with new dense buildings that block light and air, and who received only a poorly functioning POPOS in exchange, had any legal recourse.
Rights Holder
Sarah Schindler
Provenance
Received from author
File Format
application/pdf
Language
English (eng)
Extent
2 pgs
File Size
58 KB
Publication Statement
Originally published as Sarah B. Schindler, Equalizing Exactions, JOTWELL (Dec. 4, 2017), https://property.jotwell.com/equalizing-exactions/ (reviewing Gregory M. Stein, Reverse Exactions, 26 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1 (2017)).
Publication Title
Jotwell
Volume
26
First Page
1
Last Page
2
ISSN
2330-1295
Recommended Citation
Sarah B. Schindler, Equalizing Exactions, JOTWELL (Dec. 4, 2017), https://property.jotwell.com/equalizing-exactions/ (reviewing Gregory M. Stein, Reverse Exactions, 26 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1 (2017)).