6.0. SR 05-13-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Topic: Substantive Fairness: Protecting Reasonable Expectations Changed rules lead to much of today's land-use litigation, particularly when the changes in rules adversely affect a project begun under the old rules. The common law concept of vested fights as it has evolved in most of the states is inadequate to address today's complex developments. Legislatively expanding the concept of vested fights would resolve many significant disputes without significant public expenditures. Action Checklist ~ The principle of vested rights needs to be expanded by state legislatures to protect landowners who have made substantial invesnnents in reliance on regulations that were subsequently revised against their planned use of property. Topic: Substantive Fairness: Achieving Rough Proportionality Impact fees are an appropriate and probably essential part of an exactions program that imposes burdens on property owners that are "roughly proportional" to the impacts of a proposed project, a relationship required by a recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court. ~' Negotiated exaction processes rarely achieve "rough proportionality." ~' Exactions based on the location of a property (such as requiring dectication of a fight-of-way for a new throughway from everyone who owns land along it) are much less likely to achieve rough proportionality than exactions based on the impacts of proposed development. ~/ Impact fees are one way of achieving public reimbursement for the costs of new development. As the Supreme Court has emphasized, their imposition must bear a "rough proportionality" to the costs of the development. Topic: Substantive Fairness: A voiding TaKings through Regulatory Flexibility The purpose of monetary remedies is to compensate the landowner for a loss. In some cases, more flexible regulations can eliminate or substantially mitigate a loss, thus avoiding or minimizing the damages and any resulting payment.