Opinion ID: 1443424
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: determination of whether to utilize a taking analysis or a due process analysis

Text: In this state, a land use regulation which too drastically curtails owners' use of their property can cause a constitutional taking or can constitute a denial of substantive due process. [11] These two constitutional theories are alternatives in cases where overly severe land use regulations are alleged. It is critical that these two grounds be separately considered and independently analyzed because the remedies for each of these types of constitutional violation are different. [1] To determine which of these two constitutional tests to utilize, the threshold inquiry a court must make is whether the challenged regulation safeguards the public interest in health, safety, the environment or the fiscal integrity of an area. [12] A regulation which does that is to be contrasted with one that goes beyond preventing a public harm and actually enhances a publicly owned right in property. [13] Secondly, the court should ask whether the regulation destroys one or more of the fundamental attributes of ownership  the right to possess, to exclude others and to dispose of property. [14] If a regulation does not infringe upon a fundamental attribute of ownership, and if it protects the public from one of the foregoing listed harms, then no constitutional taking requiring just compensation exists. [15]