In This Issue

Real Estate

How Cities Are Responding to the Urban Agriculture Moment with Micro-Livestock Ordinances

Rasing livestock is increasingly becoming an urban phenomenon. Books helping people to grow more of their own food in the city, often called “urban homesteading,” have blossomed in the past few years. While many of these guides concern vegetable gardens, there are also books targeted to keeping goats on city-sized lots and keeping bees on rooftops and backyard balconies.1 There are numerous books about raising backyard chickens, including installments in the popular Dummies series — Raising Chickens for Dummies.2 And, many, many books are designed to help people grow more of their own food by creating an urban homestead. Backyard Homesteading3 and Your Farm in the City,4 for example, include guidance on keeping forms of livestock that many urban homesteaders agree can be especially well-suited to city life: chickens, goats, and bees.

Real Estate

The Political Economy of Land Use Governance in Santiago, Chile & Its Implications for Class-Based Segregation

In 1999, a large group of families invaded a private piece of land located in a middle class district in Santiago, Chile, called Pen˜alole´n, a district well located in terms of its proximity to Santiago’s downtown. The place was known as “La Toma de Pen˜alole´n.”1 The families, which after a couple of years totaled 1700, took the piece of land with a strong commitment to settle there and created a slum.2 The case strongly impacted public opinion, especially because it was the biggest slum created after the return of democracy in Chile and after many years of economic development.3 The families were very well organized and rejected all the offers to move to housing projects in the periphery of the city using the housing subsidies provided by the government.4 They wanted to stay in the same district, close to their social and economic networks.

Real Estate

Urbanization in Oregon: Goal 14 and the Urban Growth Boundary

The urbanization process, with its attendant concerns over the cost and provision of infrastructure, resolving conflict among land uses, allocation of land uses and provision for housing and employment, is a principal reason for planning and land use regulation in the United States. For all the talk about the superiority of the free market, Americans have often resorted to planning and land use regulation as a check on the marketplace. This article examines the planning and land use regulatory experience in Oregon under Statewide Planning Goal 14, the state’s principal method of controlling urban growth,1 and its use of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) as a means of controlling urbanization.

Courts & Judiciary

Case Notes

McCullen v. Coakley, 134 S. Ct. 2518 (2014) | Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Surgical Health Servs. v. Abbott, 748 F.3d 583 (5th Cir. 2014) | Chaudhry v. City of Los Angeles, 751 F.3d 1096 (9th Cir. 2014) | Fields v. City of Tulsa, 753 F.3d 1000 (10th Cir. 2014) | Frudden v. Pilling, 742 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2014) | Bronx Household of Faith v. Bd. of Educ. of the City of New York, 750 F.3d 184 (2d Cir. 2014) | Dariano v. Morgan Hill Unified Sch. Dist., 745 F.3d 354 (9th Cir. 2014) | Montenegro v. N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 93 A.3d 290 (N.H. 2014) | Cowan v. Cleveland Sch. Dist., 748 F.3d 233 (5th Cir. 2014) | Jackson v. City and Cnty. of San Francisco, 746 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. 2014) | Wilkins v. Daniels, 744 F.3d 409 (6th Cir. 2014) | Kagan v. City of New Orleans, 753 F.3d 560 (5th Cir. 2014) | Annex Books, Inc. v. City of Indianapolis, 740 F.3d 1136 (7th Cir. 2014) | Biery v. United States, 753 F.3d 1279 (Fed. Cir. 2014) | Kanerva v. Weems, 13 N.E.3d 1228 (Ill. 2014)