A Room with Our View

Option B:  Correct!   The Supreme Court held in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987), that a land use regulation is a taking if it does not substantially advance a legitimate state interest and denies an owner of the economically viable use of his land.  In order to substantially advance a legitimate state interest, there must be an essential nexus between the condition imposed and the interest to be advanced.  Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994).  The only state interest advanced at the public hearing was that the public enjoys viewing the ocean as it drives by the property.  This interest is not substantially related to the beach-crossing easement; therefore, requiring the easement constitutes a taking.  Although the city may still impose the condition, it will have to compensate Tess for the value of her beachfront.  Great Job.

Back to the Facts