Laserfiche WebLink
road (or pay a cash equivalent) do require the property owner to transfer <br />property to a governmental unit for public use without being compensated for it. <br />However, the case law makes it clear that merely placing conditions on <br />development permission that require the developer to transform his or her <br />private property (land, improvements, cash) into public assets is not normally an <br />unconstitutional taking or a violation of due process or equal protection. To <br />determine the constitutionality of exactions, several state courts across the <br />country have developed tests that examine the connection between the <br />exaction and the nature and extent of the need for the public facility that can be <br />attributed to the development.3~ <br /> <br />31. For a discussion of the legal issues involved in impact fees and other exactions, see Arden H. <br />Rathkopf and Daren A. Rathkopf, Rathkopf's The Law of Zoning and Planning, 4th ed., vol. I <br />(New York: Clark Boardrnan Callaghan, 1991), § 13.07; James A. Kushner, "Financing Capital <br />Improvements," in Subdivision Law and Growth Management (New York: Clark Boardman <br />Callaghan, 1993); James C. Nicholas, Arthur C. Nelson, and Julian C. Juergensmeyer, A <br />Practitioner's Guide to Development Impact Fees (Chicago: Planners Press, 1991); Arthur C. <br />Nelson, ed., Development Impact Fees (Chicago: Planners Press, 1988); Thomas P. Snyder and <br />Michael A. Stegman, Paying for Growth: Using Development Fees to FTnance Infrastructure <br />(Washinglon: Urban La'nd Institute, 1986). <br /> <br />42 <br /> <br />37 <br /> <br /> <br />