Search for: ".16 Acres of Permanent Easement"
Results 1 - 14
of 14
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Feb 2024, 1:39 pm
They can also be temporary or permanent. [read post]
15 Nov 2022, 7:54 am
Permanent Easements These projects require the companies to secure permanent easements. [read post]
13 Jan 2015, 10:20 am
The County further noted that even though the applicant has large agricultural holdings upon which easements could be placed, those easements would not reduce the number of acres lost to agricultural production, nor would they increase the number of acres under a Williamson Act contract. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 8:53 am
These reasons included: 1) the pipeline would be there forever, and would always be a "black mark" on his land; 2) the pipeline cut right through the middle of his property; 3) the pipeline owner and operator would have permanent access to come and go whenever they wanted; and 4) the pipeline easement could be freely assigned to any other company. [read post]
26 Dec 2015, 8:50 am
The enhanced deduction raises the maximum deduction a land owner can take for donating a conservation easement from 30% of their AGI to 50% (qualified farmers and ranchers can deduct up to 100% of their AGI) and increases the number of years over which the land owner can take deductions from 6 to 16 years. [read post]
19 May 2008, 7:46 am
The lawsuits also request a permanent easement - usually a small fraction of an acre - which will serve as a byway for the U.S. [read post]
16 Mar 2010, 10:03 am
• Conduct enhanced biological and water quality monitoring to protect streams and establish conservation easements to permanently protect undisturbed streams. [read post]
14 Dec 2010, 10:31 am
The FMP Guidelines specify that for a project of 20 acres or more, farmland mitigation must be satisfied by direct acquisition of a permanent agricultural conservation easement, but for a project of less than 20 acres, the County can authorize the payment of an in-lieu mitigation fee. [read post]
Appellate Court Shuts Out Trial Court in CEQA/ESA Double Header under Deferential Standard of Review
3 Apr 2014, 11:08 am
Newhall Ranch Specific Plan (the specific plan) On May 27, 2003, the County of Los Angeles approved the Newhall Ranch “specific plan” that includes a broad range of residential, mixed-use and non-residential land uses within five villages, allowing for up to 21,308 dwelling units (including 423 second units), 629 acres of mixed-use development, 67 acres of commercial uses, 249 acres of business park land uses, 37 acres of visitor-serving uses, 1,014… [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 12:30 pm
By William Abbott, Diane Kindermann, Katherine Hart, Glen Hansen, and Brian Russell Welcome to Abbott & Kindermann’s 2014 1st Quarter CEQA update. [read post]
5 Jan 2022, 3:00 am
This case presents the following issues: (1) To what extent does the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:37 pm
”19 By negative implication of R.C. 163.14, and based on growing case law, the Court stated that “special benefits” may be considered to the extent that they have a positive impact on the residue’s post appropriation value.20 13 Id. at 3-4 (based on an estimated cost of construction of $300,000 and the required use of 2.5 acres of land valued at ($95,000 per acre). 14 16 Ohio App. 3d 411, at 415 (1984). 15 First Industrial II, 2005 Ohio 6469 at 5-6;… [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:44 am
This case presents the following issues: (1) To what extent does the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. [read post]
13 Oct 2021, 5:44 am
This case presents the following issues: (1) To what extent does the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. [read post]
