![]() “Zoning for Aesthetic Objectives: A Reappraisal.” Law and Contemporary Problems 20:218. Westport, Ct.: Greenwood Press.ĭukeminier, J. Paul: West Publishing Co.ĭavis, Kenneth C. “San Francisco’s Residential Zoning: Architectural Controls in Central City Neighborhoods.” University of San Francisco Law Review 13:945.ĭavis, Kenneth C. “Law and Aesthetics: A Critique and a Reformulation of the Dilemma.” Michigan Law Review 80:355.ĭalton, Dolores Ann. “Taking Design Review Beyond the Beauty Part.” Environmental Law 9:211.Ĭostonis, John J. Rochester, N.Y.: The Lawyers Co-operative Publishing Co.īross, James L. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Īmerican Law Reports 2d 58. The City Planning Process: A Political Analysis. Progressive Architecture 48 (December): 136.Īltshuler, Alan A. Headquarters: Headquarters for Architecture?” 1967. Law in Urban Design and Planning: The Invisible Web. This chapter is adapted from the book by Richard Tseng-yu Lai. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. Its indiscriminate, often quixotic demands have overwhelmed legal institutions, which all too frequently have compromised the integrity of legislative, administrative, and judicial processes in the name of “beauty” ( Costonis, 1982, 356). Its diversion to dubious or flatly deplorable social ends undermines the credit that it may merit when soundly conceived and executed. ![]() ![]() Its purposes are seldom accurately or candidly portrayed, let alone understood, by its most vehement champions. Costonis.Īesthetic policy, as currently formulated and implemented at the federal, state and local levels, often partakes more of high farce than of the rule of law. Brennan, Jr., cited the opening statement of a law review article by New York University law professor John J. 789, 1984), Supreme Court Justice William J. In his dissent from the majority in City of Los Angeles v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |