Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

[Download] "Bradley v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development" by Fifth Circuit.*Fn* United States Court of Appeals " eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

Bradley v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development

📘 Read Now     📥 Download


eBook details

  • Title: Bradley v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
  • Author : Fifth Circuit.*Fn* United States Court of Appeals
  • Release Date : January 05, 1981
  • Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
  • Pages : * pages
  • Size : 75 KB

Description

Ann Bradley and three other residents of the City of Miami Beach, Florida,1 instituted this action against the Department of Housing and Urban Development2 (hereinafter ""HUD"") and the City of Miami Beach, Florida,3 seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the continued use of Title I Block Grant Funds obtained pursuant to the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. § 5301 et seq. (1976) (hereinafter ""HCDA"")4 until such time as the defendants complied with the HCDA and the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq. (1976) (hereinafter ""NEPA""). In their complaint, the plaintiffs alleged that the City misused Title I Block Grant Funds and failed to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (hereinafter ""EIS"") for the South Beach Redevelopment Project as required by NEPA; the plaintiffs also alleged that the federal defendants acted illegally in failing to ensure that the City complied with HCDA and NEPA. The district court entered summary judgment in favor of the defendants, dismissing the plaintiffs' NEPA claims as premature and holding that the disbursements of block grant funds by HUD and the use of those disbursements by the City were not in violation of HCDA. We affirm. The City of Miami Beach began its redevelopment activity for what is commonly known as the South Beach area in September of 1973 when it adopted a resolution establishing a building moratorium for purposes of planning redevelopment for the area. The City first applied to HUD for funds under the HCDA in April of 1975. As required by Title I of the Act, the City's application contained a statement of the City's needs and objectives, including rehabilitating the area's housing stock, preventing and eliminating blighting influences, and increasing the diversity, vitality, and economic productivity of the area. The City's application requested funding for both housing rehabilitation and redevelopment planning. In May of 1975, HUD approved the City's request for the amount of $564,000.00, $50,000.00 of which was earmarked for redevelopment planning, subject to the condition that the City comply with all environmental review requirements contained in HUD regulations. HUD regulations specifically exempt planning funds from environmental review requirements, 24 C.F.R. § 570.603, 58.21(a)(2), and the City complied with the environmental review requirements for the non-exempt funds by publishing a notice in a newspaper of general circulation of its intent not to file an EIS and, after receiving no public comments, by publishing its intent to request release of the block grant funds. HUD thereafter released the funds upon a finding that the City complied with its environmental regulations.


Ebook Download "Bradley v. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development" PDF ePub Kindle