7/29/2019 Land Use Outline

1/2

I. ZONING AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS (of landowners and developers)

1. MAJOR POLICY ARGUMENTS UNDERLYING LAND USE CLAIMSDP (14th): requires each zoning restriction be reasonably related to a legitimate governmentobjectiveTakings Clause (5th): used by some courts to examine reasonableness until Lingle

EP Clause (14th) / Takings Clause (5th): prevents landowners from shouldering unfair burdensDP (14th) / Takings Clause (5th): interferes with settled expectations1st Amendment: free expression, free religious exercise, privacy and association

Euclid v. Ambler Realty(1) presumption of constitutionality(2) constitutional if fairly debatable: or unless arbitrary and capricious(3) ordinance must be rationally related to health, safety, morals or general welfare

when you bring a facial challenge, the zoning ordinance is considered as a wholeverydifficult to succeed here

2. SUBSTANTIVE DP: States Police Power to Regulate Land Use

Is zoning constitutional? Is it consistent with states zoning power? Does government have theauthority to regulate?

judicial deference: unless arbitrary, local government knows bestconsistent withstates police power

Nectow v. City of CambridgeP wants to use entire land for industrial purposes but some of it is zoned residential. Courtupholds as applied challenge- not related to health, safety, or general welfare.

How far does police power go today?State ex rel. Stoyanoff v. Berkeley

- Land owner tried to build an ultramodern residence (ugly house) that did not fi t in with

the surrounding homes but satisfied all additional zoning and building codes, theArchitectural Review board of Ladue denied the permit.

- SC found for City because:1. Missouri Zoning Enabling Act (modeled after SZEA) authorized architectural

review.2. aesthetic objectives of the program were permissible when coupled with

the citys interest in promoting the general welfare and maintainingproperty values

3. standard of decision (to prevent unsightly, grotesque, or unsuitable structure inappearance, detrimental to the welfare of the surrounding property or residence)was not inadequate to entail an unconstitutional delegation power.

Kuvin v. Gables

- Kuvin parked his F-150 on the street in a residential area of Coral Gables and was givena violation based on sections 8-11 and 8-12, which prohibit parking a truck (thedefinition clearly includes F-150s) anywhere at any time in a residential area (including aprivate driveway) or public street between 7 am and 7 pm. Court found for the City, nowdecision is appealed. Held for Kuvin.

- Citys says they are policing the safety, morals, and general well being of citizenshowever there is no discernible relationship between this municipal regulationapplied to a vehicle, government cannot distinguish based on personal taste.

7/29/2019 Land Use Outline

2/2

Anderson v. City of Issaquah- Anderson submits building plans to Development Commission to build on his

commercial property but was rejected four times because the buildings dont fit in withthe character of Issaquah. Trial court found for town, Anderson appeals.

- Trial court decision reversed and ordered the town to issue a building certificate becausethe requirements did not give effective meaning, too subjective, building design

requirements were unconstitutionally vague

Is the challenged action legislative or administrative? legislative actions: purpose of policy irrelevant, use rational basis analysisdoes a

rational basis exist between the policy and any conceivable legitimate governmentobjective

administrative actions: court determine whether decision maker acted rationally basedupon evidence, will be set aside as arbitrary only if record contains no rational basis fordecision

3. EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSELine Drawing

Class of One Claims