Also known as: land use exaction · land-use exactions · land use exactions · exaction
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A condition attached to a land-use permit that requires a developer to dedicate land or make monetary payments to offset impacts of the proposed development.
Liam Larson sought a permit to build a warehouse on his property. The city required him to pay a charge calculated from projected revenue and collected with his tax return if he declined to install certain stormwater features. The charge raised substantial revenue and varied with business income. The court treated the charge as a tax rather than a regulatory exaction because its operation matched ordinary tax collection.
Lorenzo Lugo applied to expand his retail store. The city conditioned approval on dedicating a strip of land for a bike path and greenway. The city offered no individualized findings linking the dedication's extent to the store's traffic impact. The court held the exaction failed rough proportionality because the burden on Lugo exceeded the projected effects.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Latoya Lane requested a permit to subdivide waterfront acreage. The district demanded she pay for off-site wetland restoration instead of granting the permit outright. Lane challenged the demand as an unconstitutional condition. The court applied exaction scrutiny because the monetary requirement functioned like a demand for property interests.
Luis Lopez sought to rebuild a beachfront home. The commission granted the permit only if Lopez recorded a public access easement across the lot. The easement served general recreational goals unrelated to any specific harm from the new house. The court struck the condition for failing the nexus test.
Lily Lopez challenged a city ordinance that lowered building heights across an entire zoning district. The ordinance applied to all owners without requiring any dedication or payment from Lopez. The court held the rule was not an exaction because it imposed no individualized condition on a permit application.
Lila Lin obtained a federal warehouse license. State regulators then conditioned a local building permit on compliance with additional state storage rules. The court found the state conditions conflicted with the federal licensing scheme and could not stand as an enforceable exaction.
The government must demonstrate that the exaction is roughly proportional in nature and extent to the projected impact of the development. It bears the burden of making individualized findings rather than relying on general assertions.
Yes. The Court has held that demands for money in connection with land-use permits receive the same nexus and proportionality review as demands for real property interests.
A charge functions as a tax when it is collected through the tax system, varies with income or revenue, and is expected to raise substantial revenue, even if labeled a penalty or linked to regulatory goals.
An exaction requires an individualized dedication or payment as a condition of permit approval. A general regulation applies across the board without conditioning a specific permit on conveyance of property interests.
…to counteract the psychological barrier to access created by the new house is rejected. The condition is an unconstitutional exaction under the doctrine of Nollan v. California Coastal Commission . The Commission’s permit condition cannot be sustained as a valid exercise of its land-use power. The condition does not…