12-30-2009, 02:13 PM
Dan,
The Dolan ruling was about municipal coercion to promote land takings. In other words, the city of Tigard would only grant the permit if Dolan were to relinquish a portion of property for public purposes. The courts found that taking a portion of Dolans land for granting of the permit was unconstitutional. This was a key case that was used to regain property rights in wetlands situations also. For a long time in the PNW the ESA act was instrumental in providing an excuse for municipalities to stop people from building on their residential zoned parcels if that land was within wet land regions. Later it was found that these lots were to be allowed the right to build regardless of the many setbacks wetlands protections that had been established in the past decade. So there eventually became exceptions to these newly contrived set backs to allow house construction on lots that were otherwise not large enough to facilitate the legal setback requirements from the water to the home.
In any case, the Dolan case is similar to the O/B issue because it also revolves about governmental takings. As Bob has pointed out in the other thread, we are also looking at an unequal application of statute amongst the construction trades.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.
The Dolan ruling was about municipal coercion to promote land takings. In other words, the city of Tigard would only grant the permit if Dolan were to relinquish a portion of property for public purposes. The courts found that taking a portion of Dolans land for granting of the permit was unconstitutional. This was a key case that was used to regain property rights in wetlands situations also. For a long time in the PNW the ESA act was instrumental in providing an excuse for municipalities to stop people from building on their residential zoned parcels if that land was within wet land regions. Later it was found that these lots were to be allowed the right to build regardless of the many setbacks wetlands protections that had been established in the past decade. So there eventually became exceptions to these newly contrived set backs to allow house construction on lots that were otherwise not large enough to facilitate the legal setback requirements from the water to the home.
In any case, the Dolan case is similar to the O/B issue because it also revolves about governmental takings. As Bob has pointed out in the other thread, we are also looking at an unequal application of statute amongst the construction trades.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.