Also known as: substantially advances · substantially advancing · substantially advanced
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A means-end inquiry, once employed in regulatory-takings analysis, that asked whether a land-use regulation bore a sufficiently close relationship to a legitimate public interest it was intended to serve.
Sapphire Holdings bought air rights above a historic depot intending to build a sixty-story tower. The city then capped new construction at three stories to preserve the landmark. Sapphire can still develop a profitable low-rise project. A court finds no taking because the limit leaves reasonable beneficial use while advancing preservation.
Sasha Stone owns several parcels targeted for a city redevelopment project that will transfer some land to private developers. She argues the plan fails to advance a public purpose. The court rejects the claim after finding the legislative purpose legitimate and the means rationally connected to economic revitalization.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Selena Singh seeks to replace her beachfront bungalow with a larger home. The coastal commission grants the permit only if she dedicates a public easement along the shore. The condition does not advance visual access from the road. The court holds the exaction unconstitutional.
Solomon Silver buys coastal lots zoned for residential development. A new statute bars all construction to protect the beach. Silver can make no economic use of the land. The court finds a taking because the regulation denies all beneficial use.
Simon Stern applies to the state military college. The school admits only men under a policy that excludes women entirely. The state claims the exclusion advances leadership training. The court finds the categorical bar does not substantially advance the asserted goal.
Skyline Construction owns apartments subject to a rent-control ordinance that caps returns below market levels. The owner claims the cap fails to advance any legitimate interest. The court applies the established takings factors rather than a means-end test.
No. The substantially advance inquiry is a due process question rather than part of the takings analysis. Courts instead apply the Penn Central factors or the Lucas total-deprivation test.
Supporting sources
The substantially advance test demands a closer means-end fit than the minimal rationality required for ordinary economic regulation. It was applied to land-use exactions and conditions in cases such as Nollan.
Supporting sources
A permit condition must substantially advance the same governmental interest that would justify denial of the permit. An easement requirement that does not advance beach access therefore constitutes an unconstitutional exaction.
Supporting sources
Yes. Even when the regulation advances a legitimate goal, a court must still weigh economic impact, interference with investment-backed expectations, and the character of the government action under Penn Central.
Supporting sources
…public use, without just compensation." It is well settled that the government may impose regulations on private property that substantially advance legitimate state interests without effecting a taking. The question in this case is whether the restrictions imposed by the Landmarks Law constitute such a regulation or whether they effect…