AICP Law (recent) Test
Enter the letter for the matching Answer
| A. 2009 - Freedom of Speech - Purpose statement did not accompany sign standards; questioned state interest in size restrictions of billboard signsB. 2010 - Takings - Court upheld a local unit of government’s right to zone certain areas for mining, and prohibit mining in other areas even if no very serious consequences would result from the mining. C. 2010 - Takings - Guggenheim sued the City claiming the City's rent control ordinance was a taking without compensation.Court ruled it was not a taking.D. 2011 - Takings - Corporate park alleged conditions of approval for site plan constituted taking (off-site public improvements). Requiring off-site improvements do not constitute taking.E. 2012 - Procedural Due Process - Cities cannot negotiate proposed development plans unless specifically spelled out in ordinances.F. 2010 - Equal Protection - Board denied rezoning application for expansion of church on the basis that it was inconsistent with comp plan. Court ruled like uses should be regulated in similar ways (church vs. school)G. 2009 - Freedom of Speech - City of Houston attempted to ban billboards. Commercial signs are far more numerous than non-commercial and can be treated differently as long as it advances a substantial government interest.H. 2010 - Procedural Due Process - Minneapolis council members met illegallyI. 2009 - Takings - Littoral rights (access to the water) and beachfront property is not guaranteed. Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection allowed to renourish beach. |
Type the Question that corresponds to the displayed Answer.
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Created by:
MaxwellKD
Popular Standardized Tests sets