AICP II

Young v. American Mini Theatres - 1976

Zoning of adult entertainment facilities is not a violation of the 1st Amendment

What are the 2 legal tests for eminiment domain?

A community must prove that 1) Public Purpose 2) Necessity

Pennsylvania Coal Company v Mahon

A land regulation was that diminished the economic viability land constitutes a taking under the Fifth Amendment

Takings Definition

A restriction of the use of privately owned land, or the actual taking of the land through eminent domain by governmental entities, without fair payment and/or without any benefit to the public. Protected against by the 5th Amendment

Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas - 1974

Communities may restict unrelated individuals from living together in a single dwelling unit

Town of Windsor, CT v Whitney (1920)

Court held that cities could require developers to provide a development plan that included the layout (location, width, and building placement, and infrastructure placement) for highways & roads.

Cochran v Preston (1908)

Determined that Baltimore could control height based on the concern that excesive height could pose a fire hazard. Established a nexus between legislative intent & legislative standard.

Why was East Cleveland's "non-family" definition overturned by the courts & Belle Terra's uphelp?

E Cleveland -- The parties were RELATED though not parent/child. Belle Terra's -- The parties were UNRELATED individuals.

1978 - Takings Ruling - Penn Central Transportation Company v. City of New York

Found that a NYC Preservation Law was not a "taking" 1)Land use & economic viability remained and 2) Historic preservation is in the public's general welfare

Dowsey v Kensington (1931)

Found that there is fine line between reasonable use of police powers to restrict lawful use of private property and takings. Determined that the ordinance stepped over the line & deemed unconstitutional.

Metromedia v. San Diego - 1981

Sign ordinanced which allows commercial signs in places noncommercial signs are not allowed is unconstitution because 1) noncommercial speech has higher 1st Amendment protection than commercial speech and 2) regulations may not be based on message content

What does the term "euclidean zoning" refer to?

The act of segragating land uses from one another in order to ensure that incompatible uses do not locate in close proximity to one another. Upheld in the 1926 Landmark Planning Law Case Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty.

Nexus

The condition has a required degree of connection.

Hadacheck v Sebastian

Upheld L.A. law that prevented landowners from manufacturing bricks on private property because the property had been annexed into the city & the excavation of the valuable soil was not restricted.

Lincoln Trust Co v Williams Building Corp -- 1920

Upheld New York's zoning legislation

Welch v Sawsey (1909)

Upheld a Boston law that differentiated height restriction between commercial & residential areas. Determined that height controls were a legitimate excersise of police powers.

Austin v Older (1938)

Upheld a Michigan city ordinance that prevented an existing non-comforming use to place a second nonconforming structure on the property.

NYC Housing Authority v Muller (1936)

Upheld a NYC action to condem private property to place city owned & operated housing projects on it. Housing for poor/low income is a legitimate use concern for police powers.

Inspector of Building of Lowell v Stoklosa (1924)

Upheld city ordinance which created sepate areas/zones for business & residential areas.

Thomas Cusack Co v City of Chicago (1917)

Upheld law that allowed community members to vote on whether a billboard would be allowed in the neighborhood. Determined erection of billboards could negatively impact community's health, safety, & welfare.

Zahn v Public Works of LA (1925)

Upheld legislation that prohibited business uses in residential areas even if it diminished some of the property's value and there were business operations existing in the area that had been established prior to the zoning change.

People of Tuoky v City of Chicago (1946)

Upheld the right for a city to condem slums/blighted areas for public ownership & that levying taxes for said purpose is a legitimate exercise of a governments taxation powers.

Ayres v City of L.A. (1949)

Upheld the right for the LA planning commission to place conditions on a development during the review process. A nexus existed between the development conditions & protection of public interests.

Berman v. Parker - 1954

Upheld urban renewal practices, in which governments sought to revitalize urban areas by removing slums and eliminating blight - even those where government took the land from one pricate land owner & gave it to another private land owner

Euchlid v Ambler Realty (1926)

Upheld zoning ordinance that separated "uncompatible" land uses

What 2 amendments deal with eminent domain

1) 5th Amendment (taking without compensation 2) Fourteenth (comdementation without due process)

What are the primary tests used to analyze "Rezoning (Negotiated) Approvals"

1) Delegation of Power, 2) Procedural Due Process, 3) Substantive Due Process, 4) Equal Protection

What are the primary tests used to analyze "Discretionary Planning"

1) Delegation of Power, 2) Procedural Due Process, 3) Void for Vagueness, 4) Substantive Due Process & 5) Equal Protection

What are the primary tests used to analyze "Special Exceptions or Conditional Use Permits"

1) Delegation of Power, 2) Substantive Due Process, 3) Equal Protection, & 4) Just Compensation (takings)

According tot he Constitution AnalysisTree What are the 11 Constiution Principles land use legistation may be analyzed by?

1) Delegation of Power, 2) Void for Vagueness, 3) Procedural Due Process, 4) Substantive Due Process, 5) Equal Protection, 6) Just Compensation, 7) Ripeness, 8) Freedom of Speech, 9) Freedom of Religion, 10) Establishment Claus, 11) Free Exercise Clause

What are the primary used to analyze "Aesthetic Regulations"

1) Delegation of Power, Procedural Due Process, 3) Substantive Due Process, 4) Equal Protection, 5) Just Compensation

What 2 conditions are necessary for special exceptions, conditional use, or special use laws to be lawful?

1) Enactment of the law (must be rational) 2) Application of law (must be fairly applied through established criteria in ordinances)

What are the 3 tests for evaluating variances?

1) Enactments (rational) 2) Application (unnecessary hardship & practical dificulties) 3) Hardship creation (self imposed or external)

What are the 3 tests of a Taking Case

1) Essential Nexus 2) Rough Proportionality 3) Physical Invasion

What 2 Constitutional Amendments address due process issues

1) Fifth Amemendment & 2) 14th Amendment (Specifically addresses States)

What are the 2 types of nuisance ordinances? What do they involved

1) Private Nuisance (Property owners right to uses that promote enjoyment of their land) 2) Public Nuisance (Common right to health, safety, morals,and comfort)

What are the 2 elements of due process

1) Procedural (the way in which a law operates) 2) Substantive (what is restictions are imposed in the law)

What are the primary tests used to analyze "Downzoning"

1) Procedural Due Proces, 2) Equal Protection, 3) Substantive Due Process, & 4) Just Compensation (takings)

What are the primary tests used to analyze "Parcel Rezoning"

1) Procedural Due Process, 2) Equal Protection, 3) Substantive Due Process, 4) Just Compensation (takings)

What are the primary tests used to analyze "Prohibition of Places of Worship"

1) Substantive Due Process, 2) Freedom of Religion, 3) Equal Protection

What are the primary tests used to analyze "Prohibition of Adult Uses"

1) Void for Vagueness, 2) Equal Protection, 3) Freedom of Speech, 4) Substantive Due Process

Munn v. Illinois

1877 - A landmark decision that paved the way for future governmental intervention in private development.

Welch v. Swasey

1909 - The first clear-cut nationwide authority for communities to regulate development of private property through limitation of building heights, and to vary these heights by zone.

Eubank v. City of Richmond

1912 - Setback legislation declared constitutional.

Hadacheck v. Sebastian

1915 - Provided that the restriction of future profitable uses was not a taking of property without just compensation.

Town of Windsor v. Whitney

1920 - Made land subdivision regulations possible by holding that dedication of streets as a prerequisite to platting was possible.

Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon

1922 - Takings Case - Restrictions on Use - Justice Holmes wrote in opinion "The general rule...is, that while property maybe regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking"

Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.

1926 - Takings - Restrictions on Use -This case upheld zoning as constitutional under the United States Constitution, as being within the police power of the state. If zoning classifications were reasonable, then they would be upheld

Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas

1974 - Upheld power to prohibit more than two unrelated individuals from residing together as a family.

Young. v. American Mini Theaters

1976 - Communities can zone locations of adult entertainment establishments without violating the 1st Amendment.

Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City

1978 - Takings - Restriction on Use - Upheld that the restrictions imposed (by the Landmarks Law) are substantially related to the general welfare and not only permit reasonable use but also afford appellants opportunities to further enhance the property.

Agins v. City of Tiburon

1979 - Takings - Restriction on Use - Two prong test - 1 "does not substantially advance legitimate state interests" or 2 "denies an owner economically viable use of his land"

Metromedia v. City of San Diego

1981 - Ordinances that placed tighter restrictions on non-commercial signs than commercial signs violate the 1st Amendment.

Renton v. Playtime Theaters

1986 - Upheld separation or concentration requirements for adult uses where a substantial government interest exists.

Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. v. DeBenedictis

1987 - Takings - Affirmed Agins Test 1 - Stated that some states interest are more "legitimate than others" The more defensible the states interest the more likely it will be upheld.

Nollan v. California Coastal Commission

1987 - Takings - Expanded Agins Test 1 required a Nexus between the taking and the state's interest.-

Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council

1992 - Takings - Expanded Agins test 2 - found a takings when the owner was called upon to sacrifice all economically beneficial uses in the name of the common good.

Dolan v. City of Tigard

1994 - Takings - Expanded Agins Test 1 - "required a reasonable relationship" between the conditions to be imposed on a permit and the development's impact. "rough proportionality"

What must every government action do to be lawful? Test against a Takings.

All land use and zoning regulations must advance a legitimate public interest.

Procedural Due Process

An assurance that all parties to the proceeding are treated fairly and equally.

Second Prong of the Agins Test

An owner may not be denied economically valuable use of his or her land.

What Landmark Case established the right to zone or redevelop land for aesthetic / master planning purposes?

Berman v Parker 1954

Explain Eminent Domain & what historical law it orginates from

Eminent domain is the fundamental soverign power to take private property for public use that originates from the Magna Carta

What are the primary tests used to analyze "Prohibition of Group Homes"

Equal Protection

Munn v Illinois (1876)

In this case which concerned whether a grain operator had to comply with city ordinances, the court ruled that private property becomes a public interest when it is used in a manner which affect the community at large

What is significant about the taking ruling in Berman v Parker - 1954

It changed the test for eminent domain as the Court transformed the words 'public use' to mean 'public purpose'.

Dolan v City of Tigard, 1994

Landmark Case that established test of essential nexus & rough proportionality

Welton v Hamilton (1931)

Overturned a Chicago ordinance which delegated zoning appeals to another body that had not been elected by the citizens without providing standards for ruling & criteria for judgement which resulted in the body having arbitrary authority.

Eubank v City of Richmond (1912)

Overturned a Richmond ordinance that enabled a set of property owners from controling the private rights of others in the neighborhood. Resulted in a deprivation of due process & equal protection.

Romar Realty v Board of Commissioners (1921)

Overturned a law which sought to establish building heights & lot lines expressly for "aesthetic considerations" because such concerns do not impact health, safety, & welfare of a community.

US v Certain Lands, City of Louisville (1935)

Overturned a proposed US gov't action to secure lands through condemnation for purpose of cleaning slums as a provision of the National Industrial Recovery Act. Determined the federal gov't has no police powers in local land use concerns.

Washington Ex Rel. Seattle Trust Co v Roberge

Overturned an ordinance that arbitrarily delegated power to determine acceptance of child/senior home to the surrounding property owners. Violation of due process.

Jones v City of Los Angeles (1930)

Overturned part of a legislation that sought to cause exisiting businesses to cease once a new zoning classification was placed upon it. Upheld idea of "nonconforming uses"

Substantive Due Process

Payment by government of just compensation to property owners when property is condemned or dimished by government action.

5th Ammendment

Protects agains a taking without just compensation

First Prong of the Agins Test

Regulations must substantially advance a legitimate state (governmental) interest.

AGINS V. TIBURON (1980) -- What is the Takings Test that resulted from this ruling?

The AGINS test asks whether the regulation advances some legitimate government purpose and whether the property owner has any economic use left over after the regulation is applied. If the answer to either part is no, a taking may be found

1977 Moore v East Cleveland

The Court found an ordnance that prevented a grandmother and a grandson from living together violated the Due Process Law of the 14th Ammendment

What does the POLICE POWER of Planning refer to?

The regulation of personal property to prevent a use of the property that is detrimental to the public interest or general welfare.

village of euclid v ambler realty -- 1926

The six-to-three decision in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. legitimized zoning as a way of controlling land uses.