Land Use Law Commons^™

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.

Rising Tides--Changing Title: Court To Mull Takings Issue, John R. Nolon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Walton County v. Stop the Beach Renourishment, Inc., where novel questions arose concerning sea level rise and constitutional property rights of beachfront landowners. In Florida, the state government owns in trust, all beach property below the mean high tide water line, while beachfront landowners own the rights to any land above the mean high tide water line. The line shifts along with beachfront as the beach expands and contracts. In this Florida case, landowners challenge a state statute, which precludes the ocean property line from shifting in favor of the private …

The Track Record On Takings Legislation: Lessons From Democracy's Laboratories, John D. Echeverria, Thekla Hansen-Young

Georgetown Environmental Law & Policy Institute Papers & Reports

This report by the Georgetown Environmental Law & Policy Institute, entitled "The Track Record on Takings Legislation: Lessons from Democracy's Laboratories," examines the experiences of Florida, Oregon, and several other states with legislation implementing the property rights agenda. The report is the first comprehensive effort to systematically identify and evaluate the on-the-ground consequences of so-called takings "compensation" laws. The major findings of the report are that the takings agenda has undermined community protections by forcing a roll back of existing legal rules and/or by exerting a chilling effect on new legislative activity, special interests such as developers and timber companies …

Law Of The Land – Year In Review, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

This column reviews trends and interesting cases in land use law as reported on “Law of the Land” during the last half of 2007. “Law of the Land” is a blog created to be of interest to land use lawyers, planners, developers, professors, and students. The blog is updated daily with a review of a recent land use case decided by a state or federal court. In addition, the site has reported on relevant gubernatorial executive orders, offered book reviews, and occasionally starts a discussion on current events issues, such as climate change and has led to robust debate about …

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 nuisance doctrine. As this Article …

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"

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

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

A Warning To States — Accepting This Invitation May Be Hazardous To Your Health (Safety, And Public Welfare): An Analysis Of Post-Kelo, Joshua Ulan Galperin

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Focusing on Delaware, this article will argue that the United States Supreme Court's decision in Kelo v. New London gave state legislatures an open invitation to shape their public use frameworks, but their responses must be measured and well-reasoned because the consequences of reactionary legislation may put a stranglehold on state and local governments trying to exercise eminent domain for unanimously accepted public uses. Part I will trace the most pertinent federal jurisprudence through Kelo. Part II will survey Delaware’s public use jurisprudence. Part III will introduce the Delaware General Assembly’s legislative response to Kelo. Part IV will serve as …

Planning As Public Use?, Nicole Stelle Garnett

Journal Articles

This short Essay explores the Supreme Court's suggestion in Kelo v. New London that public, participatory planning may be a constitutional safe harbor that separates impermissible private takings from presumptively valid public ones. After briefly reviewing the Court's discussion of the planning that preceded the Kelo litigation, the Essay examines how Kelo's emphasis on planning departs from standard rational basis review of economic policies and asks what such a departure means for future public-use litigants. The Essay then explores three possible practical benefits of a constitutional rule that encourages the government to engage in detailed planning before exercising the power …

Slides: Sea Level Rise: Let The Lawsuits Begin!, John P. Casey

Climate Change and the Future of the American West: Exploring the Legal and Policy Dimensions (Summer Conference, June 7-9)

Presenter: John P. Casey, Land Use Attorney, Robinson & Cole, Hartford, CT.

1 page and 75 slides.

Using the changing nature of coastal shorelines as a basis for his presentation, Mr. Casey will discuss the challenges of protecting a landowner's interest in preserving her land, while at the same time protecting the environment and respecting the natural changes that are bound to occur over time. Mr. Casey will focus on the how the application of laws designed to protect the environment - especially in cases where changes take place over time to alter the physical characteristics of the land - …

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

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 …

Measure 37 And A Spoonful Of Kelo: A Recipe For Property Rights Activists At The Ballot Box, Patricia E. Salkin, Amy Lavine

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

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 …

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.

'Takings' Clarified: U.S. Supreme Court Provides Clear Direction, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The United States Supreme Court holding in Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc. clarified years of takings jurisprudence and overturned a controversial decision in the case of Agins v. City of Tiburon. This article discusses how the Lingle court denounced the “substantially advances” test created in Agins, as a due process inquiry rather than a proper takings test. The Lingle court instead opted to create a clear four-category paradigm for takings cases, which focuses on the burden the government places on private property rights in order to distinguish takings categories.

Michigan Supreme Court Overturns Landmark Eminent Domain Case, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Court Reviews: The Takings Doctrine And Exactions, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Exactions occur when applications to develop parcels of land require governmental permission, and that permission is conditioned upon dedicating part of the land to public use. Exactions have long been challenged as regulatory takings, and both federal and state courts look at these types of regulations with a heightened level of scrutiny due to the nature of exactions to remove a crucial element from the bundle of property rights associated with ownership of real property: the right to exclude. This column discusses a recent example of exactions jurisprudence applied in New York and goes on to compare that decision in …

Community Redevelopment, Public Use, And Eminent Domain, Patricia E. Salkin, Lora A. Lucero

Scholarly Works

Published just weeks before the U.S. Supreme Court handed down their controversial decision on Kelo v. City of New London in 2005, this article, in correctly predicting the outcome of the Supreme Court opinion, explores in Section I how the concept of what constitutes a public use has evolved over the decades from traditionally accepted uses such as public roads, buildings (e.g., government buildings and schools), and utilities to urban redevelopment. It explains how the broad concepts of community redevelopment have been stretched to encompass needed economic development projects that promise jobs, tax revenue, and other public benefits similar to …

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

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 …

Exacting Tests: Determining When A Taking Is Unconstitutional, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In the past, courts generally deferred to legislatures when determining whether a law constitutes a regulatory taking. However, not all regulations are treated equal, and different tests apply to different types of regulations. Types of land use actions with a lower threshold of constitutionally include exactions, and regulations that apply fixed fee schedules to private landowners. This article combs both federal and New York law to come to the clear determination that universal standards exist for each type of regulation.

Regulatory Takings: Governments Can Avoid Successful Challenges, John R. Nolon, Jessica A. Bacher

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

Many local officials have the misguided belief that their utilization of land use regulation is greatly impeded by private rights to develop. However, land use regulations have a strong assumption of validity, with courts unlikely to overturn the regulations unless they are clearly erroneous or unreasonable or have no connection to a valid public interest. In addition to explaining development rights, this article provides the reader with insightful information on how local legislatures enact regulations while avoiding regulatory takings challenges.

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

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Supreme Court Takes A Look At Takings, John R. Nolon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In the case of Pazzalo v. Rhode Island the United States Supreme Court reversed a determination by the Rhode Island Supreme Court which held that land owners had no right to sue for a regulatory taking if the land owners purchased title to land on which a preexisting restriction existed. Before this case, the rule in New York also precluded landowners from challenging land use regulations that existed at the time they purchased land. After holding that a regulatory takings challenge existed, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to Rhode Island to decide whether the preexisting regulations affected the …

Trouble Preserving Paradise?, Nicole Stelle Garnett

Journal Articles

Election day 2000 was not a good day for proponents of suburban growth controls. The overwhelming initial support for initiatives that proposed state-wide growth management plans in Colorado and Arizona withered in the face of vigorous opposition campaigns. And, pro-planning forces in Oregon woke up on Wednesday morning to learn that voters had approved a little-noticed initiative amending the state constitution to require compensation for partial takings - that is, for any reduction in the fair market value of property resulting from government regulation - thus throwing into question the future of the State's widely touted model controlled-growth scheme.

These …

Regulatory Takings: Analyzing Governmental Invasions Of Private Property Rights, John R. Nolon

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

The complicated arena of takings jurisprudence has confused lawyers, scholars, and courts for well over a century. Generally, a taking is deemed to have occurred when a governmental body takes a property right away from a private individual without providing just compensation. However, courts are unlikely to find that a regulation constitutes a taking if the regulation benefits the greater good of the public. Takings come in several varieties, most notably, “invasions” which include physical occupation and “total takings”, which deprive landowners of all economic value of their property. This article discusses how takings law has evolved into its present …

Tort Law, Honorable Leon D. Lazer

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.