Also known as: land-use · land uses · land usage · zoning
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Regulation of the uses to which real property may be put, effected primarily through zoning ordinances that divide municipalities into districts and prescribe permitted activities within each. Such regulation is a valid exercise of the police power when reasonably related to public health, safety, morals, or general welfare. Preexisting lawful uses receive protection through vested-rights doctrines, while new restrictions may trigger takings analysis or equal-protection review.
Luke Latham sought a special-use permit to open a group home for adults with intellectual disabilities in a residential zone. The city council denied the permit solely because neighbors objected to the residents' mental condition. The denial violated equal protection because the classification lacked any legitimate governmental interest beyond prejudice.
Lamar Lewis operated a small manufacturing plant that became nonconforming after the city rezoned the area residential. The city attempted to shut down the plant immediately. Lewis retained the right to continue the preexisting use because it was lawful when established and had not been abandoned.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Lucy Liu purchased a lot subject to a private covenant limiting building height. The city later enacted a stricter zoning ordinance. The zoning restriction operated independently of the private covenant because public land-use regulations are not servitudes.
Lorenzo Lugo owned a parcel zoned for commercial use on one side of a street but residential on the other. The city refused to rezone the residential portion despite no relation to health or safety. The classification was invalid because it arbitrarily deprived Lugo of beneficial use without advancing a legitimate purpose.
Lucia Lopez obtained a building permit and spent substantial sums constructing a retail center in reliance on existing zoning. The city then rezoned the area to prohibit retail uses. Lopez acquired a vested right to complete the project because the good-faith expenditures made revocation inequitable.
Luis Lopez owned a historic terminal building whose renovation plans were blocked by a landmarks ordinance. The ordinance substantially advanced a legitimate public interest in preservation and left Lopez with a reasonable beneficial use. The regulation did not constitute a compensable taking under the multi-factor analysis.
The owner generally retains a vested right to continue the preexisting lawful use. The right may be lost through abandonment, discontinuance for the statutory period, or amortization in some jurisdictions.
A vested right arises when the owner makes substantial expenditures in good-faith reliance on a permit or existing zoning. Jurisdictions vary between requiring substantial construction and applying a balancing test.
Courts weigh the economic impact on the claimant, interference with investment-backed expectations, and the character of the governmental action. Regulations that substantially advance legitimate interests and leave reasonable beneficial use are generally not compensable.
Such classifications receive rational-basis review. The government may not act from mere prejudice, and a zoning denial lacking any legitimate interest violates equal protection.
…method of achieving its goals is not by acquisitions of historic properties,[^maj-6] but rather by involving public entities in land-use decisions affecting these properties and providing services, standards, controls, and incentives that will encourage preservation by private owners and users.[^maj-7] While the law does…