flexiblefullpage - default
Currently Reading

The Legal Trail to Del Monte Dunes

Advertisement
billboard - default

The Legal Trail to Del Monte Dunes

Builders and developers have been winning arguments before the Supreme Court for several years now, each time building on the legal ground of their previous victory.


June 30, 1999
This article first appeared in the PB July 1999 issue of Pro Builder.
Builders and developers have been winning arguments before the Supreme Court for several years now, each time building on the legal ground of their previous victory. Gus Bauman has been involved in nearly every one, and here he relates the key substantive legal principles of these key cases.

Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City (1978) As a precursor to the concept of rough proportionality, the Supreme Court ruled that the economic impact of exactions and/or regulations on the property owner must be balanced, with the public interest being advanced by the government.

Agins v. City of Tiburon (1980) The Court stated in this case that in order for a developer to bring a regulatory takings claim to court, he must have first submitted a formal development proposal that was denied.

MacDonald, Sommer & Frates v. Yolo County (1986) The Court ruled here that just because a development proposal plan is denied (especially if it is a grandiose plan), then it is not necessarily a takings case. The landowner must attempt to scale down the plan.

First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los Angeles (1987) Bauman refers to this as the "true landmark case" for builders and developers because of three points. First, if land-use regulations go too far, then the case may be a takings case for which (second main point) the remedy is just compensation. Third, the taking does not have to be permanent to be considered a regulatory taking-it may only be for a short period of time.

Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987) Another very important case, decided two weeks after the First English case. The Court ruled here that exactions that bear no relationship to the public good can be considered a taking.

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council (1992) In this decision, the Court ruled that a 100% economic wipeout for the landowner due to regulations is automatically a per se taking.

Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994) Here the Court ruled that the burden of proving that exactions placed on the landowner are proportional to the impact on the public (rough proportionality) rests with the government.

Also See:
Supreme Court Rules On Land-Use Case

Advertisement
leaderboard2 - default

Related Stories

Land Planning

Helena Habitat for Humanity Aims to Build 1,000 Affordable Homes

A new Habitat for Humanity project in Helena, Mont., aims to deliver 1,000 affordable housing units and outdoor community amenities 

Government + Policy

How Eminent Domain May Be Used to Respond to Climate Crises

Eminent domain, which grants the government power to take private property for public use, has displaced thousands of Americans for the sake of infrastructure in the past, but it may be used for a better purpose in a global climate crisis

Q+A

Soil Connect Is Moving Dirt and Building Relationships

Cliff Fetner created Soil Connect so builders and developers could more easily move dirt and other aggregates from jobsite to jobsite, but it has expanded to become something much more

Advertisement
boombox1 -
Advertisement
native1 - default
halfpage2 -

More in Category

Delaware-based Schell Brothers, our 2023 Builder of the Year, brings a refreshing approach to delivering homes and measuring success with an overriding mission of happiness

NAHB Chairman's Message: In a challenging business environment for home builders, and with higher housing costs for families, the National Association of Home Builders is working to help home builders better meet the nation's housing needs

Sure there are challenges, but overall, Pro Builder's annual Housing Forecast Survey finds home builders are optimistic about the coming year

Advertisement
native2 - default
Advertisement
halfpage1 -

Create an account

By creating an account, you agree to Pro Builder's terms of service and privacy policy.


Daily Feed Newsletter

Get Pro Builder in your inbox

Each day, Pro Builder's editors assemble the latest breaking industry news, hottest trends, and most relevant research, delivered to your inbox.

Save the stories you care about

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet lorem ipsum dolor sit amet lorem ipsum dolor sit amet.

The bookmark icon allows you to save any story to your account to read it later
Tap it once to save, and tap it again to unsave

It looks like you’re using an ad-blocker!

Pro Builder is an advertisting supported site and we noticed you have ad-blocking enabled in your browser. There are two ways you can keep reading:

Disable your ad-blocker
Disable now
Subscribe to Pro Builder
Subscribe
Already a member? Sign in
Become a Member

Subscribe to Pro Builder for unlimited access

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.