Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Selected Works (20)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (6)
- University of Colorado Law School (6)
- University of Florida Levin College of Law (4)
- University of Pittsburgh School of Law (4)
-
- BLR (3)
- Seattle University School of Law (3)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (3)
- University of Maine School of Law (3)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- University of Montana (2)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- Georgetown University Law Center (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- Notre Dame Law School (1)
- Pace University (1)
- Pepperdine University (1)
- SelectedWorks (1)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (1)
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (1)
- University of South Carolina (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Faculty Scholarship (4)
- Scholarly Works (4)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (4)
- Articles (3)
- Donald J. Kochan (3)
-
- ExpressO (3)
- Maine Law Review (3)
- Patricia E. Salkin (3)
- Seattle University Law Review (3)
- The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8) (3)
- Timothy M. Mulvaney (3)
- Michael E Lewyn (2)
- Public Land & Resources Law Review (2)
- Touro Law Review (2)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Christine A. Klein (1)
- Christopher Serkin (1)
- Cleveland State Law Review (1)
- Danaya C. Wright (1)
- Daniel B Kelly (1)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Erin Ryan (1)
- External Development Affecting the National Parks: Preserving "The Best Idea We Ever Had" (September 14-16) (1)
- Faculty Publications (1)
- Fordham Law Review (1)
- Garrett Power (1)
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (1)
- Gerald S. Dickinson (1)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (1)
- Matthew Parlow (1)
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 31 - 60 of 66
Full-Text Articles in Land Use Law
Inclusionary Eminent Domain, Gerald S. Dickinson
Inclusionary Eminent Domain, Gerald S. Dickinson
Gerald S. Dickinson
This article proposes a paradigm shift in takings law, namely “inclusionary eminent domain.” This new normative concept – paradoxical in nature – rethinks eminent domain as an inclusionary land assembly framework that is equipped with multiple tools to help guide municipalities, private developers and communities construct or preserve affordable housing developments. Analogous to inclusionary zoning, inclusionary eminent domain helps us think about how to fix the “exclusionary eminent domain” phenomenon of displacing low-income families by assembling and negotiating the use of land – prior to, during or after condemnation proceedings – to accommodate affordable housing where condemnation threatens to decrease …
Koontz V. St. Johns River Water Management District, Ross Keogh
Koontz V. St. Johns River Water Management District, Ross Keogh
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Koontz extends the application of Nollan and Dolan, which require exactions of real property for land-use permits to share a “nexus” and be “roughly proportional” to the regulation to be constitutional. A divided United States Supreme Court held that “monetary exactions,” potentially including building permit fees or impact fees, must satisfy the Nollan and Dolan requirements even if the government denies the permit.[1] The Court did not reach the merits of the petitioner’s appeal.
[1](Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., dissenting).
Something Rich And Strange: Progressive Land Use Regulation And The Takings Doctrine, Philip C. Dales
Something Rich And Strange: Progressive Land Use Regulation And The Takings Doctrine, Philip C. Dales
Philip C. Dales
ABSTRACT:
Something Rich and Strange: Progressive Zoning and the Takings Doctrine.
Philip Carter Dales
May, 2013
University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
The list of municipalities adopting form-based codes continues to grow, with one study putting the number at over 250, including Miami, Denver, Cincinnati and other major cities around the United States. These codes represent land use regulation that is fundamentally different from traditional Euclidean zoning. Rather than prescribing allowable uses, FBCs focus on the governance of form, with the goal of ensuring predictable outcomes for the built environment and simplifying complex use-based zoning ordinances.
In …
U.S. Supreme Court Hands Two Big Wins To Municipal Governments In 2001-2002 Term, Patricia E. Salkin
U.S. Supreme Court Hands Two Big Wins To Municipal Governments In 2001-2002 Term, Patricia E. Salkin
Patricia E. Salkin
No abstract provided.
Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin
Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin
Patricia E. Salkin
No abstract provided.
U.S. Supreme Court’S 2004 Term Includes Significant Land Use Decisions With A Trilogy Of Takings Cases, Patricia E. Salkin
U.S. Supreme Court’S 2004 Term Includes Significant Land Use Decisions With A Trilogy Of Takings Cases, Patricia E. Salkin
Patricia E. Salkin
No abstract provided.
Agins V. City Of Tiburon: Open Space Zoning Prevails - Failure To Submit Master Plan Prevents A Cognizable Decrease In Property Value, Jermaine Chastain
Agins V. City Of Tiburon: Open Space Zoning Prevails - Failure To Submit Master Plan Prevents A Cognizable Decrease In Property Value, Jermaine Chastain
Pepperdine Law Review
This casenote examines the Supreme Court's struggle to reconcile its focus on the facial validity of a zoning ordinance with the traditional "taking" approach requiring diligent factual inquiry. While the Agins Court reiterates such an approach, the author notes the Court's departure from important constitutional and precedential considerations. The author offers a possible explanation for the departure, concluding that the Agins decision apparently makes plan submission a prerequisite for acknowledging economic loss and strongly implies a requirement of complete loss of all property value before a compensable taking will be recognized.
Exactions For The Future, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Exactions For The Future, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Faculty Scholarship
New development commonly contributes to projected infrastructural demands caused by multiple parties or amplifies the impacts of anticipated natural hazards. At times, these impacts only can be addressed through coordinated actions over a lengthy period. In theory, the ability of local governments to attach conditions, or “exactions,” to discretionary land use permits can serve as one tool to accomplish this end. Unlike traditional exactions that regularly respond to demonstrably measurable, immediate development harms, these “exactions for the future” — exactions responsive to cumulative anticipated future harms — admittedly can present land assembly concerns and involve inherently uncertain long-range government forecasting. …
Proposed Exactions, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Proposed Exactions, Timothy M. Mulvaney
Faculty Scholarship
In the abstract, the site-specific ability to issue conditional approvals offers local governments the flexible option of permitting a development proposal while simultaneously requiring the applicant to offset the project’s external impacts. However, the U.S. Supreme Court curtailed the exercise of this option in Nollan and Dolan by establishing a constitutional takings framework unique to exaction disputes. This exaction takings construct has challenged legal scholars on several fronts for the better part of the past two decades. For one, Nollan and Dolan place a far greater burden on the government in justifying exactions it attaches to a development approval than …
Justice John Paul Stevens - His Take On Takings, Alan C. Weinstein
Justice John Paul Stevens - His Take On Takings, Alan C. Weinstein
Law Faculty Articles and Essays
This commentary reviews and analyzes Justice John Paul Stevens's role in shaping the Court's views on the takings issue in land use regulation.
The Wholesale Decommissioning Of Vacant Urban Neighborhoods: Smart Decline, Public-Purpose Takings, And The Legality Of Shrinking Cities, Ben Beckman
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note is principally concerned with those takings that arise from the State's exercise of eminent domain, either directly or through the State's designee. To put a finer point on it, this Note addresses the distinction that property-rights advocates have developed to delegitimize certain types of takings. This distinction divides condemnations into disfavored-yet-legitimate takings-the direct-government-use and common-carrier takings-and ostensibly illegitimate public-purpose takings. The property-rights movement unequivocally places economic-development takings in the illegitimate category. The status of blight-remediation takings is ambiguous but tends toward legitimacy.
2009 Planetizen Blog Posts, Michael Lewyn
2009 Planetizen Blog Posts, Michael Lewyn
Michael E Lewyn
Ripe Standing Vines And The Jurisprudential Tasting Of Matured Legal Wines – And Law & Bananas: Property And Public Choice In The Permitting Process, Donald J. Kochan
Ripe Standing Vines And The Jurisprudential Tasting Of Matured Legal Wines – And Law & Bananas: Property And Public Choice In The Permitting Process, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
From produce to wine, we only consume things when they are ready. The courts are no different. That concept of “readiness” is how courts address cases and controversies as well. Justiciability doctrines, particularly ripeness, have a particularly important role in takings challenges to permitting decisions. The courts largely hold that a single permit denial does not give them enough information to evaluate whether the denial is in violation of law. As a result of this jurisprudential reality, regulators with discretion have an incentive to use their power to extract rents from those that need their permission. Non-justiciability of permit denials …
The New Nuisance: An Antidote To Wetland Loss, Sprawl, And Global Warming, Christine A. Klein
The New Nuisance: An Antidote To Wetland Loss, Sprawl, And Global Warming, Christine A. Klein
UF Law Faculty Publications
Marking the fifteenth anniversary of Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council -- the modern U.S. Supreme Court's seminal regulatory takings decision -- this Article surveys Lucas's impact upon regulations that restrict wetland filling, sprawling development, and the emission of greenhouse gases. The Lucas Court set forth a new categorical rule of governmental liability for regulations that prohibit all economically beneficial use of land, but also established a new defense that draws upon the states' common law of nuisance and property. Unexpectedly, that defense has taken on a life of its own -- forming what this Article calls the new …
Historical Evolution And Future Of Natural Resources Law And Policy: The Beginning Of An Argument And Some Modest Predictions, Sally K. Fairfax, Helen Ingram, Leigh Raymond
Historical Evolution And Future Of Natural Resources Law And Policy: The Beginning Of An Argument And Some Modest Predictions, Sally K. Fairfax, Helen Ingram, Leigh Raymond
The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)
8 pages.
Includes bibliographical references
"Sally Fairfax, UC-Berkeley, Helen Ingram, UC-Irvine, and Leigh Raymond, Purdue University" -- Agenda
The Growing Influence Of Tort And Property Law On Natural Resources Law: Case Studies Of Coal Bed Methane Development And Geologic Carbon Sequestration, Alexandra B. Klass
The Growing Influence Of Tort And Property Law On Natural Resources Law: Case Studies Of Coal Bed Methane Development And Geologic Carbon Sequestration, Alexandra B. Klass
The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)
19 pages.
"Alexandra B. Klass, Associate Professor of Law, University of Minnesota Law School"
Law Casebook Description And Table Of Contents: Constitutional Environmental And Natural Resources Law [Outline], Jim May, Robin Craig
Law Casebook Description And Table Of Contents: Constitutional Environmental And Natural Resources Law [Outline], Jim May, Robin Craig
The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)
6 pages.
"James May, Widener University School of Law" -- Agenda
The "Public Use" Requirement In Eminent Domain Law: A Rationale Based On Secret Purchases And Private Influence, Daniel B. Kelly
The "Public Use" Requirement In Eminent Domain Law: A Rationale Based On Secret Purchases And Private Influence, Daniel B. Kelly
ExpressO
This article provides a rationale for understanding and interpreting the “public use” requirement within eminent domain law. The rationale is based on two factors. First, while the government often needs the power of eminent domain to avoid the problem of strategic holdout, private parties are usually able to purchase property through secret buying agents. The availability of these buying agents makes the use of eminent domain for private parties unnecessary (and indeed, undesirable). The government, however, is ordinarily unable to make secret purchases because its plans are subject to democratic deliberation and known in advance. Second, while the use of …
The Takings Clause, Version 2005: The Legal Process Of Constitutional Property Rights, Mark Fenster
The Takings Clause, Version 2005: The Legal Process Of Constitutional Property Rights, Mark Fenster
ExpressO
The three takings decisions that the Supreme Court issued at the end of its October 2004 Term marked a stunning reversal of the Court’s efforts the past three decades to use the Takings Clause to define a set of constitutional property rights. The regulatory takings doctrine, which once loomed as a significant threat to the modern regulatory state, now appears after Lingle v. Chevron to be a relatively tame, if complicated, check on exceptional instances of regulatory abuse. At the same time, the Public Use Clause, formerly an inconsequential limitation on the state’s eminent domain authority, now appears ripe for …
Regulating Land Use In A Constitutional Shadow: The Institutional Contexts Of Exactions, Mark Fenster
Regulating Land Use In A Constitutional Shadow: The Institutional Contexts Of Exactions, Mark Fenster
UF Law Faculty Publications
The regulatory takings doctrine, the Supreme Court declared in Lingle v. Chevron, concerns the effects of a regulation on the incidents of property ownership. It serves as a constitutional protection against regulations that impose the functional equivalent to a classic taking of private property (an appropriation by the state or an ouster), and it requires compensation for owners who are subject to such regulations. Just as significant as declaring what the regulatory takings doctrine is, theCourt in Lingle also declared what it is not: it is not a judicial check onthe validity or reasonableness of a regulation that …
Unintended Consequences: Eminent Domain And Affordable Housing, Matthew J. Parlow
Unintended Consequences: Eminent Domain And Affordable Housing, Matthew J. Parlow
Matthew Parlow
U.S. Supreme Court’S 2004 Term Includes Significant Land Use Decisions With A Trilogy Of Takings Cases, Patricia E. Salkin
U.S. Supreme Court’S 2004 Term Includes Significant Land Use Decisions With A Trilogy Of Takings Cases, Patricia E. Salkin
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin
Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Gone Too Far: Measure 37 And The Perils Of Over-Regulating Land Use, Sara C. Bronin
Gone Too Far: Measure 37 And The Perils Of Over-Regulating Land Use, Sara C. Bronin
Sara C. Bronin
In November 2004, Oregonians passed a ballot measure, Measure 37, that presented a radical remedy for landowners by preventing the state from engaging in regulatory takings without compensating landowners. It required that local governments either monetarily compensate landowners whose properties fall in value as a result of land use regulations or, under certain conditions, exempt those landowners from the regulations altogether. At its core, Measure 37 addressed Oregon voters' concern that - for all the good the land use system had done - the government had gone too far in prohibiting landowners from using their land as they saw fit. …
Takings Formalism And Regulatory Formulas: Exactions And The Consequences Of Clarity, Mark Fenster
Takings Formalism And Regulatory Formulas: Exactions And The Consequences Of Clarity, Mark Fenster
UF Law Faculty Publications
A vocal minority of the U.S. Supreme Court recently announced its suspicion that lower courts and state and local administrative agencies are systematically ignoring constitutional rules intended to limit, through heightened judicial review, exactions as a land use regulatory tool. This article argues that the Court's suspicions are well founded but that blame for judicial and administrative noncompliance lies with the Court's bifurcated approach to the Takings Clause.
A New Time For Denominators - Toward A Dynamic Theory Of Property In The Regulatory Takings Relevant Parcel Analysis, Danaya C. Wright
A New Time For Denominators - Toward A Dynamic Theory Of Property In The Regulatory Takings Relevant Parcel Analysis, Danaya C. Wright
UF Law Faculty Publications
This Article explores the question of how the courts should calculate the denominator in the just compensation equation. The denominator is the amount of property a claimant owns, against which the effects of regulation will be measured. If a landowner owns a single acre that is severely regulated, the takings fraction for the amount of property taken compared to that owned will approach one. If, on the other hand, the landowner owns 100 acres and only one is regulated, the amount of harm is only 1% in comparison to the total amount owned. This Article advocates a paradigm shift in …
Takings Formalism And Regulatory Formulas: Exactions And The Consequences Of Clarity, Mark Fenster
Takings Formalism And Regulatory Formulas: Exactions And The Consequences Of Clarity, Mark Fenster
ExpressO
A vocal minority of the U.S. Supreme Court recently announced its suspicion that lower courts and state and local administrative agencies are systematically ignoring constitutional rules intended to limit, through heightened judicial review, exactions as a land use regulatory tool. Exactions are the concessions local governments require of property owners as conditions for the issuance of the entitlements that enable the intensified use of real property. In two cases decided over the past two decades, Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987) and Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994), the Court has established under the Takings Clause a logic and metrics …
U.S. Supreme Court Hands Two Big Wins To Municipal Governments In 2001-2002 Term, Patricia E. Salkin
U.S. Supreme Court Hands Two Big Wins To Municipal Governments In 2001-2002 Term, Patricia E. Salkin
Scholarly Works
No abstract provided.
Zoning, Taking, & Dealing: The Problems And Promise Of Bargaining In Land Use Planning, Erin Ryan
Zoning, Taking, & Dealing: The Problems And Promise Of Bargaining In Land Use Planning, Erin Ryan
Erin Ryan
Municipal land use bargaining may imply as many problems as it heralds promise, but it is widely acknowleged as the universal language of land use planning. Planners and scholars agree that public-private negotiation plays a central role in the vast majority of local land use decision-making. At least in part, this is a result of the peculiar attributes of the resource at issue. Land is, perhaps, the ultimate nonfungible. Each parcel of land possesses unique characteristics not only in its physical attributes, but also by virtue of its location, and its proximity to other unique parcels. Moreover, land uses implicate …
"Public Use" And The Independent Judiciary: Condemnation In An Interest-Group Perspective, Donald J. Kochan
"Public Use" And The Independent Judiciary: Condemnation In An Interest-Group Perspective, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
This Article reexamines the doctrine of public use under the Takings Clause and its ability to impede takings for private use through an application of public choice theory. It argues that the judicial validation of interest-group capture of the condemnation power through a relaxed public use standard in Takings Clause review can be explained by interest group politics and public choice theory and by institutional tendencies inherent in the independent judiciary. Legislators can sell the eminent domain power to special interests for almost any use, promising durability in the deal given the low probability that the judiciary will invalidate it …