Transportation network improvements have only marginal impacts unless either land use policies or transportation measures take seemingly costly directions, such as increasing mass transit service frequency, or by imposing additional fuel taxes or implementing costly congestion pricing to use a Corridor. Alternatively, radical initiatives such as the sale of public lands to an enterprise with a transportation authority component to develop transit-surrounding parcels (or sell them to the private sector for development), repurposing of brownfields or implementing performance zoning standards, will spur denser land development. Despite these realities, the public’s focus on increasing accessibility opportunities is focused, incorrectly I believe, on implementing devices relying on technological advances from artificial intelligence (AI) to the burgeoning Internet of Things (using 4 and 5G platforms) to move travelers faster and less stressfully. Focus on regional planning, especially, goes missing from this current environment. Initially in this paper, I review the nature of the traffic problems affecting heavily-traveled arterial streets in urban cores today, referring to these key rights of way as “Corridors” throughout this paper. Next, I explain why towns cannot bank on transportation infrastructure planning being “left up to AI and the IoT environment.” Then, I outline 10 “cubular” principles of land planning for communities grappling with Corridor gridlock and other issues affecting the quality of life from poor movement of motorized devices, velocipedes and persons walking alongside city streets. These principles are sensible when imagining Corridors in their three dimensions, adopting a sort of new “vertical urbanism,” where major thoroughfares insinuate themselves into the core areas of our planning landscapes.

However the reader approaches the study of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, there are numerous applied ethical issues implicated by their lives. The paper asks, among other questions, whether a new norm exists defining personal information and data as a “public good.” Under this view, anyone using the Internet seemingly has relinquished any direct (or exclusive) ownership claim to her data (personal information) or images of resemblance. In truth, part of data ownership is about control over our personhood, over the stories conveyed about us, and over what can be known about us. The meaning of the data is something that the person who generates the data can never really be detached from. To that extent, personal data represents intimate aspects of ourselves that we can't be separated from, no matter the motive of those seeking to partition the individual from the narrative.Loss of control over personal information is especially troubling in the current environment in which enterprises like Google cannot form, or maintain for extended periods, ethics boards charged with directing policy on extracting, bundling and sharing of personal information of users of SaaS and Web platforms. The fact that California in 2018 passed the CCPA or the EU its Data Privacy Regulation is cold comfort given the "personal-data gold rush" underway evidenced in the business of mining, bundling and sale of information. Remaining competitive, it seems, is more consequential than being respectful, or even cognizant, of the individual's ownership of her or his essential personhood.The essay is a vehicle for reflection for business ethicists about an essential moral issue for our time: the destructive social, as well as personal, impacts of compromised individual privacy in the digital-platform and social media realms.

This paper addresses the public's and the private sector's distraction from the hard work of infrastructure planning and implementation coordination, as they hope instead that IoT + AI + 5G = guaranteed achievements in mobility in dense urban areas. Not so fast, citizens. This paper identifies four fundamentally false suppositions about the state of play in transportation infrastructure planning meriting healthy skepticism if not outright rejection by the public and elected officials alike. Alternatively, stakeholders can let 'er rip and watch the Facebook "re-run" applied to mobility pathways of congested urban areas – when technologies' gurus ask regulators to help them solve runaway problems caused by their conjoined good intentions and tunnel-visions. There's time to prepare municipal infrastructure and accompanying land use regulation for the advent of even the most modestly-scaled numbers of autonomous vehicles. In the fashion of Paris and other cities implementing bike lanes during the novel coronavirus pandemic, why not do exactly that?

Major cities regulate tall building signs to ensure that they do not cause safety issues or create aesthetic blight. Crafting regulations weighing the need to be seen with issues of public safety and aesthetics is a fine balancing act. Those installing these signs do so trusting that their messages will be readable by and appropriately impress all who view them. The same is true for those who generate public art displays like media facades and LED screens, which, being more artistic (in theory), argue for lighter regulations than those accorded commercial advertising signs. Meanwhile, residential neighbors want to sleep after dark, without blackout drapes festooning every homeowner's living area window. And cities want a vibrant commercial district that is exciting and affords visual stimulation, creating the 24-hour city – but not fostering overstimulation with accompanying neighbor anger, zoning hearing warfare and mass-media aesthetic critique.How ought community regulators to proceed in this era of artistic creativity, cutthroat advertising competition and the social trend embracing endless self-presentation? This paper posits one theory, grounded in purpose that affords viewer awareness of illuminated signs and artistry, without making commercial signs and digital media projections a main event in the municipal mixed use residential and commercial neighborhood.

This essay first describes how New Localism impacts local governments' authority in the planning and zoning realm. The paper's second section deals with vigilance required on the part of local government units' administrations. Vigilance is needed to ensure their citizenries keep faith in community zoning processes. This is possible, among other methods, by requiring disclosures of interests and financial support sources from all parties engaged in adversarial zoning adjustment processes as advocates or lobbyists and by educating adjudicators about the permissible scope of contact with stakeholders in these disputes. Other techniques, such as enhanced fact-finding, also are discussed.

Many more American lawyers than in prior generations are working longer, in some cases substantially into old age, for economic and assorted other reasons ranging from egotism to craving mental stimulation that only practice can afford them. Progressive dementing illnesses loom as threats to these practitioners’ continued endeavors and the essential ethical obligation of competent representation. This paper summarizes the salient “rules” or “standards” of conduct applying to senior-in-age counsel. The author ruminates about malpractice implications for employers of attorneys exhibiting symptoms of PDIs affecting their competence, asking whether attorney ethical rules dictate the malpractice standard of care in such situations. The author further examines in brief the impact in private practice of shareholder agreements provisions on departure, and asks whether ethical policies affect those in public service likewise. Proposed ABA Resolution 103 promoting the Model Impairment Policy for Legal Employers urges all legal employers to lead by adopting its basic principles. That Model Policy contains an admonition that legal employers commit to assisting their employees in obtaining treatment when needed. Impairment of a legal employee, due to substance use or other mental health disorder, including cognitive impairment or dementia, adversely affecting the individual’s well-being and “the legal employer’s ability to serve clients capably and responsibly.” The author examines whether this proposed model policy affords greater protection of the public and of attorneys remaining in practice, and what policies legal employers might implement to supplement the Model Impairment Policy’s intentions.

Populist Placemaking is a paper on land use and local government administrative law. It forecasts the course of, and charts a path for, citizen engagement in and control of land use determinations, focusing on the making of place. The paper describes “place” in psychological and social terms, with reference to place’s reciprocity of nurturing with individuals. Placemaking is consequential because the growing disappearance of place in cities and towns today diminishes community building, quality of life enhancement, and social capital and trust creation. The erosion of place may be accelerated by increasing rejection by many youth of the physical realm, replaced by their attachments to more-familiar digital space, as described in the paper. I then describe the trend of citizen-scientists’ increasing influence in the planning realm, enabled by technology innovation in popular culture. It describes the rise of social media’s capacity to increase the knowledge and skills of everyday citizens, leading to greater populist contributions to the land-planning enterprise. The paper argues that technology is not the foe of placemaking, if properly deployed jointly by citizens and those who govern locally. Pivoting from the surge of citizen place-determination, I turn to recommending specific modifications for community master land use plan development and local planning commission composition and roles. I suggest implementing floating zones, a little-used albeit widely understood land regulation technique, to facilitate placemaking and periodic repurposing of those places. Finally, I describe how land trusts, joint development agreements, civic crowd-funding and social entrepreneurship partnership opportunities offer citizens more direct inputs into development of publicly-promoted spaces to become and to remain unique, diverse expressions of community character that nurture, and in turn are nurtured by, their citizens.

This paper tackles fair remuneration to amateur athletes competing at, and for, America’s postsecondary schools. The easy (therefore popular) analysis of present conditions proceeds that since the NCAA makes hundreds of millions of dollars from athletics, as do its member institutions, partial college athletics’ income redistribution to players harms the institutions little while giving these hard-working athletes some compensation. Litigation in the federal courts, especially the Ninth Circuit district and those appellate courts parsing Sherman Act Rule of Reason mechanics, grinds toward tentative solutions but no “global” resolution. Judicial “legislation” breaking the logjam between opposing doctrines of amateurism and just financial rewards promises further chaos. Meanwhile, pundits weigh in on college athlete compensation thinking through few among the myriad ramifications of creating a “free labor market” in elite male athletes’ services, through which postsecondary institutions bid for their services without compensation limits. Universities decry an open marketplace for such players as unsustainable, guarantying the bankruptcy of their college sports enterprise and perhaps the insolvency of entire post-secondary institutions. No position seems entirely authentic, and seldom is any position evidence-based.I address the implications of paying college athletes in this paper, rescuing from potential college athlete marketplace confusion (and looming insolvency) a compensation system I believe both fairly “pays” athletes and maintains calm and predictability in athletics’ administrations that budget and fundraise to remunerate athletes. I acknowledge that athletes are not receiving as much as they might earn outside the academy, in view of their personal sacrifices to the success of their sports programs. Yet I hold the perspective that college players are not firmly established as the main force behind university successes, athletically or otherwise. Finally, I address the pervasive reach of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a bastion pundits believe readily will be breached if universities and the NCAA will just open their wallets. Not so fast, the paper explains – since Title IX prohibits discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance, this federal law is an “inconvenient truth” not to be swept away by enthusiasts of paying college athletes in “revenue” sports. Readers aligned with “laissez faire” or “hold fast to amateurism” camps in this athlete compensation debate will find my proposed solutions irritating – perhaps food for thoughtful conversations about future stewarding of college athletics and their participants.

Avenues for local government participation in UAV regulation reside in the land planning and zoning processes of cities and metropolitan areas (including via regional transportation planning). My essay explains how land use governance relates intimately to aerial regulation of commercial drones. Soon enough, drone over-flight will affect profoundly cargo transportation inside a community's boundaries and the quality of life of everyone who lives within them.

Land use matters produce high volumes of “combatants.” Developers change neighborhoods and daily routines, not always for the better. Disruption of street life at the granular level has devastating impacts on those sharing one neighborhood. Poor and lower income populations, and increasingly middle income persons, cannot afford hiring lawyers to represent them in costly land use battles. Local regulators are charged with securing competing goals: to protect property owners against the potential erosion of their wealth and health caused by new development, and to promote their towns’ economic efficiency and growth for competitiveness. This difficult balance at times renders outcomes of land use hearings incredible or irrationally-based on the surface. Local bureaucrats are not oblivious but have limited opportunity to focus on some negative dimensions of development; and in Therapeutic Jurisprudence terms, resulting intense public disaffection with an administrative legal process like land use regulation is unhealthful. Academics and practitioners urge American law schools to teach collaborative problem-solving and unconventional forms of conflict resolution, while Therapeutic Jurisprudence advocates urge introducing students to how legal processes and their actors affect a community’s well-being. The Task Force on the Future of Legal Education was created in summer 2012, charged to recommend to the American Bar Association how law schools, the ABA, and other groups and organizations might take concrete steps to address issues concerning the economics of legal education and its delivery. The task force’s Final Report (January, 2014, page 24) tells law schools to accommodate missions featuring more skills-related courses and simulations of real-world law practice (experiential learning), so that new graduates have some competencies in delivering some legal services (Page 26, Report). This paper addresses a proposed experiment at the confluence of currents of public disenchantment, citizen underrepresentation and lawyering-education transition. While the legal clinic specializing in mediation of land use controversies conceived here has built-in challenges, the Task Force affirmed that 21st Century legal education needs “a much stronger culture of innovation, nimbleness and attention to factors outside the academy.” (Pages 4 and 27, Report) As explained in the paper, focused clinic student participants will gain a sense of citizenship and appreciation of the power of Therapeutic Jurisprudence to raise public spirits while learning practical problem-solving skills like active listening and task-absorption. The risk-reward balance favors engaging both law schools and their surrounding communities in the proposed clinic endeavor.

Technology, coupled with present economic conditions and the interest of younger Americans in sustainability, is enabling a climate favorable to collaborative consumption. More individuals will be engaged over time in this “sharing economy” because underemployment of the middle class, and a majority of all non- or under-skilled workers, is a chronic condition eluding public sector solution. This new resources “lending” and social networking culture - not your ordinary "home occupations" - assures ongoing introductions of sharing producers and consumers to each other and into residential neighborhoods. The results will include increased traffic trips, overtaxed curbside parking spaces, additional ambient noise and stress upon electric and other utility grids tapped by sharing enterprises. Since these neighborhood burdens are not addressed in the form of sales taxes or license fees returned directly to host enclaves, many of these burdens are borne uniquely by the neighboring dwellers. Local persons not participating in the sharing economy expect their daily routines to continue without interference from unfamiliar persons, noises and odors, free from the disadvantages of increased traffic and reduced curbside parking.Communities now are challenged to regulate sharing uses in this new economic order while accommodating opportunities for such enterprises to generate revenue and taxes that will rebuild a struggling middle class. In one regard, accommodation invites struggles between established neighborhood dwellers and later - arriving sharing producers working outside zoning regulations. Yet outright prohibiting of entrepreneurial models in residential zoning districts counters local governments’ efforts to remake the economic and social landscape of urban communities, especially those precariously mired in joblessness, crime and other evidence of disorder. Many sharing economy voices argue that today’s good land use decisions mandate subordinating traditional-neighborhood inconvenience to this new economy's benefit to the larger community - serving thereby the “greater good.” This is among the first papers in American academic legal literature addressing how communities comprehensively can respond to this challenge, through productively modernizing governmental spatial regulatory prerogatives while incorporating “big data” along with crucial citizen inputs at this land use crossroads.

Is urban center retailing in a death spiral? Competition for consumers with Internet vendors is afoot; winners and losers shall be anointed. The threats to physical retailing in an era of the “Internet of Goods” initially are described below. Adaptations by tenants, landlords, and stakeholders in urban centers will be required quickly, and new perspectives and partnerships, including those among local and regional governments, are instrumental if physical retail operations in municipal cores are to survive. The balance of this article describes these needs from the vantage point of each stakeholder; but this article argues that integrating information and communication technological infrastructure into retail leasing practices and land use planning and zoning strategies is inescapable for the maintenance of resilient town centers. Part II of this article describes the overwhelming impact of Internet consumerism upon physical retailing while Part III explains the physical milieu’s remaining but shrinking opportunities to remain competitive with the online consumer realm. Parts IV and V demonstrate how information and communication technologies, with innovative strategizing by retailers and their landlords, can be leveraged to incite lasting consumer interest in physical shopping environments within a community’s commercial nodes. Parts VI and VII articulate the municipal imperatives, including policies to implement robust technology infrastructure and capitalizing on ICT’s inherent “intelligence,” required to maintain commercial core competitiveness.

This paper argues that economic competitiveness requires cities and towns to reimagine their zoning regulations, leveraging technology advances to address challenges revealed by demands for sustainability in building urban projects. The optimal means to accomplish this is to implement performance guidelines through repurposed zoning regulations. Performance standards encourage creative solutions to negative impacts caused by increasing development densities. Performance zoning consists of a series of standards addressing specific sub-optimal neighborhood or community impacts of commercial development; these standards express municipal goals for sustainability and environmental justice. Pivoting to performance zoning from standard Euclidean zoning is desirable because the development community has a firmer grasp on how to mitigate negative externalities than does a bureaucracy declining to partner with experts from the private sector. I assert that community competitiveness, enticing millennials to join sustainability – focused enterprises and occupy sustainable buildings, is advanced by adopting performance zoning conventions. The paper initially reviews fundamentals of community competitiveness; then describes the Millennial generation’s support for sustainability benchmarking; it next describes illustrative technology innovations introducing a new era of built-environment sustainability performance; and finally it addresses why performance zoning protocols optimally advance community sustainability while growing competitiveness through increased livability.

Branded real estate projects are better positioned in marketing circles than equivalent projects lacking iconic associations like "Trump [development type]." Real estate today is a consumer product in one seminal respect. Brand reflects upon the lifestyles of persons shopping, eating, working and sojourning in a distinctive place. Development projects today brand to differentiate themselves from other places and to message to their potential shoppers, consumers, tenants or owners what it's like to engage in a dynamic environment or to enjoy the creative energy of like-minded occupants or the surrounding neighborhood. Messaging speaks volumes about the image and reputation of a commercial property – and affects the developer's expected value as well as the momentum of the project's lease-out or "unit" sales. Brand creates an emotional, visceral connection with shoppers, travelers, workers or whomever is the target of the "experience" narrative.

Technology capacity and innovations conflate notions of private and public spaces; the latter today incorporate the Internet “lane,” while private spaces seek access to that pathway. Merchants and their landlords seemingly find themselves in a paradox. They must embrace consumer technology expectations to populate mercantile premises as public spaces. At the same time, merchants must make stores and restaurants places of novelty to grip the attention of customers seeking to share the intimacy of their experience with everyone. Technology presents physical retailing with its greatest threat while potentially becoming its strongest ally if properly channeled. Advocates for urban centers’ sustained vitality must translate into action technology and communications currents to retain merchandising’s vital role in place-making in CBDs, downtowns and similar densely developed community gathering places. This essay describes how stakeholders, including city and town administrators, must imprint public and private spaces (like retailing premises) to produce sustained demand for physical merchandising in dynamic community hives through innovative land use regulations and ICT management policies.

This paper argues that historic preservation, in addition to preserving sensory memories, must balance protecting heritage assets with urban center growth objectives to enable high-quality built environments and community sustainability. Preservationists, whether private enterprises or public bodies, must adopt preservation strategies joining the past, present and future of community development. Historic assets transcending their original purposes can be adaptively reused to be both useful and sustainable. Repurposing these assets triggers increased livability in urban centers. To optimize historic assets’ sustainability, preservationists must partner with promoters in central business districts of sustainability and economic growth initiatives. Taking into account the larger significance of community cohesion and livability for all citizens, certain constraints upon historic designation, and broadened development opportunities for sensitive and sustainable preservation projects, must be infused into the community planning apparatuses within state and local governments. Without such constraints and opportunities, more listed structures in city centers ultimately will be lost because they simply are too decrepit or cost-ineffective to rehabilitate relative to their limited heritage significance. A community’s livability is diminished when historic properties or sites are desecrated by natural causes or neglect of proper conservation techniques. These episodes create health and safety hazards for an urban center while thwarting revitalization. Such problems are most apparent in communities that are shrinking cities and are avoidable through various approaches discussed in the paper. As the fiftieth anniversary of the National Historic Preservation Act approaches, I offer a specific agenda to integrate better historical assets’ preservation with sustaining their host planet and re-energizing neighborhood contexts. Minimizing frequency of underutilized or neglected historic assets is possible by early utility and sustainability analyses in the designation-advocacy process. Alliances of public and private bodies will promote adaptive reuse of heritage properties, in the process maximizing their contribution to sustainable and high-demand urban centers.

How should land use regulators respond when their communities are economically deprived?

Community interest in occupation-based approaches to urban economic development remains strong in this country. This paper addresses how communities manage their way (adopting policies implicating land use and environmental sustainability principles by means of repurposing buildings while sharing additional community assets and “campus” leasing actions) to attract private sector higher education providers to establish its downtown as a node of intellectual stimulation, including cultural diversions. This paper identifies the goals of higher education institutions attracted to such an opportunity to expand their student bases in a time of heightened competition from proprietary institutions capitalizing on “career” orientations. Etching the ivory tower environment into community centers sustains the quality of place, thereby attracting the “creative class,” which forms the core of leadership and entrepreneurship in America’s knowledge economy. After identifying the “town’s” and “gown’s” respective value propositions in this unusual public-private partnership, this paper analyzes the essential interests of each party to a multi-institution leasing transaction and how the parties’ respective vital needs can be met in a commercial lease instrument. The appendix to this paper affords the reader a template of critical leasing terms for establishing this unique form of higher educational cooperative.

This article describes opportunities in Comprehensive Plan (aka General Plan or Master Plan) initial adoption or subsequent amendment processes where stakeholders provide inputs on behalf of a diverse citizens community. The moderation process described here involves the City of Scottsdale, Arizona, currently engaged in developing its 2014 Plan which seeks to extend the city’s planning vision through 2045. Part II of this article provides a brief primer of a General Plan’s role in the exercise of the municipal police power. Parts III and IV describe the history of the Scottsdale experience in amending its General Plan with citizen aid and rebellion. Part V delivers some observations about a citizen input method into planning matters that is subject to popular critique. Part VI summarizes the purpose of citizen inputs into a comprehensive plan, and how professional moderation of the stakeholders' inputs may appropriately channel public contributions to a municipality's land use vision without distortion or corruption of the process.

This article begins with this simple proposition: An infill transit construction project’s work destroys businesses in its right-of-way, pavement-chewing path. Transit construction’s collateral damage dislocates neighborhoods and unravels the social fabric of a community as locally established business operations fail. This article explains how cities with transit projects currently attempt solutions to the problem like rendering “marketing and social networking” advice and founding “business alliances” – and why cities fall short of their goal to stave off merchant failures. It next explains why merchant claims against cities asserting nuisance or regulatory takings are doomed to failure – and how cities waste scarce resources defending against takings claims, whatever their ultimate outcome. The article then describes how innovations in land use policy-making, using overlay and floating district adoption, zoning adjustment and joint development agreements, can sustain commerce in transit project construction zones for the duration of a transit infrastructure project.