Dolan v. City of Tigard

Summary

The United States Supreme Court held that development exactions imposed as conditions on a land-use permit must have an essential nexus to a legitimate governmental interest and must be roughly proportional in nature and extent to the projected impact of the proposed development. Applying that standard, the Court examined the City of Tigard’s requirements that the petitioner dedicate land for flood control and a pedestrian/bicycle pathway. The decision addresses the Takings Clause and the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine.

Holdings

1. When a government conditions approval of a land-use permit on the dedication of property, there must be an essential nexus between the legitimate governmental interest and the permit condition, and the required dedication must bear a rough proportionality to the projected impact of the proposed development.
2. For an adjudicative permit condition imposed on an individual parcel, the municipality bears the burden of making an individualized determination that the required dedication is related both in nature and extent to the impact of the proposed development.
3. The city failed to establish the required relationship between the permanent public floodplain and recreational greenway easement and Dolan's proposed development.
4. The city failed to demonstrate that the pedestrian/bicycle pathway dedication was roughly proportional to the traffic impacts of Dolan's proposed development.

Questions Presented

1. What degree of connection must exist between development exactions imposed as permit conditions and the projected impacts of the proposed development under the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause?
2. Whether the city demonstrated the required connection between the floodplain dedication and the proposed development.
3. Whether the city demonstrated the required connection between the pedestrian/bicycle pathway dedication and the proposed development's projected traffic impacts.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded