North Ogden City Zoning Code

11-4

CONSTITUTIONAL TAKINGS PROCEDURES

11-4-1: POLICY CONSIDERATION

The city strongly favors, as a matter of policy, the careful consideration of matters involving constitutional taking claims invoked by a desire to be fair to the owner of private property bringing the claim and in view of the uncertainty and expense involved in defending lawsuits alleging such issues. At the same time, the legitimate role of government in lawfully regulating the use of real property and the public's right to require the dedication or exaction of property consistent with the constitution must be preserved. Consistent with this policy, the city desires to establish procedures to govern the review of actions that may involve the issue of constitutional taking. These procedures are intended to assist the city in its consideration of decisions that may involve constitutional takings. This chapter is further intended and shall be construed to review claims objectively and fairly by citizens seeking payment of just compensation as a result of city action, yet preserve the ability of the city to lawfully regulate real property and fulfill its other duties and functions.
Actions by the city involving the physical taking or exaction of private real property is not a "constitutional taking" if the physical taking or exaction bears an essential nexus to a legitimate governmental interest and is roughly proportionate and reasonably related, on an individualized property basis, both in nature and extent, to the impact of the proposed development on the legitimate government interest.

11-4-2: GUIDELINES ADVISORY

The guidelines adopted and decisions rendered pursuant to the provisions of this chapter are advisory, and shall not be construed to expand or limit the scope of the city's liability for a constitutional taking. The reviewing body or person shall not be required to make any determination under this Title, except pursuant to CCNO 11-5-4.

11-4-3: REVIEW OF DECISION

Any owner of private real property who claims there has been a constitutional taking of his private real property may request a review of a final decision of any city officer, employee, board, commission or council. The following are specific procedures established for such a review:
1. Determination Received. The person requesting review must have obtained a final and authoritative determination, internally, within the city, relative to the decision from which they are requesting review.
2. Time Limit to File. Within thirty (30) days from the date of the final determination that gave rise to the concern that a constitutional taking has occurred, the person requesting the review shall file in writing, in the office of the city recorder, a request for review of that decision. A copy shall also be filed with the city attorney.
3. Review Scheduled. The City Council or an individual or body designated by the City Council, shall immediately set a time to review the decision that gave rise to the constitutional taking claim.
4. Information Required. In addition to the written request for review, the applicant must submit to the City Manager, prior to the date of review, the following:
  1. Name of applicant requesting review;
  2. Name and business address of current owner of the property, form of ownership, whether sole proprietorship, for profit or not for profit corporation, partnership, joint venture or other, and if owned by a corporation, partnership, or joint venture, name and address of all principal shareholders or partners;
  3. A detailed description of the grounds for the claim that there has been a constitutional taking;
  4. A detailed description of the property taken;
  5. Evidence and documentation as to the value of the property taken, including the date and cost as of the date the property was acquired. This should include any evidence of the value of that same property before and after the alleged constitutional taking, the name of the party from whom purchased, including the relationship, if any, between the person requesting a review and the party from whom the property was acquired;
  6. Nature of the protectable interest claimed to be affected (such as, but not limited to, fee simple ownership, leasehold interest);
  7. Terms (including sale price) of any previous purchase or sale of a full or partial interest in the property in the three (3) years prior to the date of application;
  8. All appraisals of the property prepared for any purpose, including financing, offering for sale, or ad valorem taxation, within the three (3) years prior to the date of application;
  9. The assessed value of and ad valorem taxes on the property for the previous three (3) years;
  10. All information concerning current mortgages or other loans secured by the property, including name of the mortgagee or lender, current interest rate, remaining loan balance and term of the loan and other significant provisions, including, but not limited to, right of purchasers to assume the loan;
  11. All listings of the property for sale or rent, price asked and offers received, if any, within the previous three (3) years;
  12. All studies commissioned by the petitioner or agents of the petitioner within the previous three (3) years concerning feasibility of development or utilization of the property;
  13. For income producing property, itemized income and expense statements from the property for the previous three (3) years;
  14. Information from a title policy or other source showing all recorded liens or encumbrances affecting the property; and
  15. Additional information reasonably necessary, in the opinion of the City Council, to arrive at a conclusion concerning whether there has been a constitutional taking.
5. Certification of Completeness. An application shall not be deemed to be "complete" or "submitted" until the city certifies to the applicant that all materials and information required above have been received by the city. The city shall promptly notify the applicant of any incomplete application.
6. Review. The City Council shall review all the evidence related to and submitted by the applicant, city or any other interested party, and may hold a hearing to aid in the review.
7. Final Decision. A final decision on the review shall be rendered within fourteen (14) days from the date the complete application for review has been received by the city. The final decision shall be given in writing to the applicant and City Council that rendered the final determination that gave rise to the request for review.
8. Failure to Decide. If the City Council fails to hear and decide the review within fourteen (14) days, the decision appealed from shall be presumed to be affirmed.

11-4-4: REVIEWING GUIDELINES

If the aggrieved private property owner chooses to follow this procedure, the City Council, shall review the facts and information presented by the applicant to determine whether or not the action by the city constitutes a "constitutional taking", as defined in this chapter. In doing so, they shall consider:
1. Whether the physical taking or exaction of the private real property bears an essential nexus to a legitimate governmental interest.
2. Whether a legitimate governmental interest exists for the action taken by the city.
3. Whether the property and exaction taken is roughly proportionate and reasonably related, on an individual property basis, both in nature and extent, to the impact caused by the activities that are the subject of the decision being reviewed.

North Ogden City Zoning Code

11-4

CONSTITUTIONAL TAKINGS PROCEDURES

11-4-1: POLICY CONSIDERATION

The city strongly favors, as a matter of policy, the careful consideration of matters involving constitutional taking claims invoked by a desire to be fair to the owner of private property bringing the claim and in view of the uncertainty and expense involved in defending lawsuits alleging such issues. At the same time, the legitimate role of government in lawfully regulating the use of real property and the public's right to require the dedication or exaction of property consistent with the constitution must be preserved. Consistent with this policy, the city desires to establish procedures to govern the review of actions that may involve the issue of constitutional taking. These procedures are intended to assist the city in its consideration of decisions that may involve constitutional takings. This chapter is further intended and shall be construed to review claims objectively and fairly by citizens seeking payment of just compensation as a result of city action, yet preserve the ability of the city to lawfully regulate real property and fulfill its other duties and functions.
Actions by the city involving the physical taking or exaction of private real property is not a "constitutional taking" if the physical taking or exaction bears an essential nexus to a legitimate governmental interest and is roughly proportionate and reasonably related, on an individualized property basis, both in nature and extent, to the impact of the proposed development on the legitimate government interest.

11-4-2: GUIDELINES ADVISORY

The guidelines adopted and decisions rendered pursuant to the provisions of this chapter are advisory, and shall not be construed to expand or limit the scope of the city's liability for a constitutional taking. The reviewing body or person shall not be required to make any determination under this Title, except pursuant to CCNO 11-5-4.

11-4-3: REVIEW OF DECISION

Any owner of private real property who claims there has been a constitutional taking of his private real property may request a review of a final decision of any city officer, employee, board, commission or council. The following are specific procedures established for such a review:
1. Determination Received. The person requesting review must have obtained a final and authoritative determination, internally, within the city, relative to the decision from which they are requesting review.
2. Time Limit to File. Within thirty (30) days from the date of the final determination that gave rise to the concern that a constitutional taking has occurred, the person requesting the review shall file in writing, in the office of the city recorder, a request for review of that decision. A copy shall also be filed with the city attorney.
3. Review Scheduled. The City Council or an individual or body designated by the City Council, shall immediately set a time to review the decision that gave rise to the constitutional taking claim.
4. Information Required. In addition to the written request for review, the applicant must submit to the City Manager, prior to the date of review, the following:
  1. Name of applicant requesting review;
  2. Name and business address of current owner of the property, form of ownership, whether sole proprietorship, for profit or not for profit corporation, partnership, joint venture or other, and if owned by a corporation, partnership, or joint venture, name and address of all principal shareholders or partners;
  3. A detailed description of the grounds for the claim that there has been a constitutional taking;
  4. A detailed description of the property taken;
  5. Evidence and documentation as to the value of the property taken, including the date and cost as of the date the property was acquired. This should include any evidence of the value of that same property before and after the alleged constitutional taking, the name of the party from whom purchased, including the relationship, if any, between the person requesting a review and the party from whom the property was acquired;
  6. Nature of the protectable interest claimed to be affected (such as, but not limited to, fee simple ownership, leasehold interest);
  7. Terms (including sale price) of any previous purchase or sale of a full or partial interest in the property in the three (3) years prior to the date of application;
  8. All appraisals of the property prepared for any purpose, including financing, offering for sale, or ad valorem taxation, within the three (3) years prior to the date of application;
  9. The assessed value of and ad valorem taxes on the property for the previous three (3) years;
  10. All information concerning current mortgages or other loans secured by the property, including name of the mortgagee or lender, current interest rate, remaining loan balance and term of the loan and other significant provisions, including, but not limited to, right of purchasers to assume the loan;
  11. All listings of the property for sale or rent, price asked and offers received, if any, within the previous three (3) years;
  12. All studies commissioned by the petitioner or agents of the petitioner within the previous three (3) years concerning feasibility of development or utilization of the property;
  13. For income producing property, itemized income and expense statements from the property for the previous three (3) years;
  14. Information from a title policy or other source showing all recorded liens or encumbrances affecting the property; and
  15. Additional information reasonably necessary, in the opinion of the City Council, to arrive at a conclusion concerning whether there has been a constitutional taking.
5. Certification of Completeness. An application shall not be deemed to be "complete" or "submitted" until the city certifies to the applicant that all materials and information required above have been received by the city. The city shall promptly notify the applicant of any incomplete application.
6. Review. The City Council shall review all the evidence related to and submitted by the applicant, city or any other interested party, and may hold a hearing to aid in the review.
7. Final Decision. A final decision on the review shall be rendered within fourteen (14) days from the date the complete application for review has been received by the city. The final decision shall be given in writing to the applicant and City Council that rendered the final determination that gave rise to the request for review.
8. Failure to Decide. If the City Council fails to hear and decide the review within fourteen (14) days, the decision appealed from shall be presumed to be affirmed.

11-4-4: REVIEWING GUIDELINES

If the aggrieved private property owner chooses to follow this procedure, the City Council, shall review the facts and information presented by the applicant to determine whether or not the action by the city constitutes a "constitutional taking", as defined in this chapter. In doing so, they shall consider:
1. Whether the physical taking or exaction of the private real property bears an essential nexus to a legitimate governmental interest.
2. Whether a legitimate governmental interest exists for the action taken by the city.
3. Whether the property and exaction taken is roughly proportionate and reasonably related, on an individual property basis, both in nature and extent, to the impact caused by the activities that are the subject of the decision being reviewed.

North Ogden City Zoning Code

11-4

CONSTITUTIONAL TAKINGS PROCEDURES

11-4-1: POLICY CONSIDERATION

The city strongly favors, as a matter of policy, the careful consideration of matters involving constitutional taking claims invoked by a desire to be fair to the owner of private property bringing the claim and in view of the uncertainty and expense involved in defending lawsuits alleging such issues. At the same time, the legitimate role of government in lawfully regulating the use of real property and the public's right to require the dedication or exaction of property consistent with the constitution must be preserved. Consistent with this policy, the city desires to establish procedures to govern the review of actions that may involve the issue of constitutional taking. These procedures are intended to assist the city in its consideration of decisions that may involve constitutional takings. This chapter is further intended and shall be construed to review claims objectively and fairly by citizens seeking payment of just compensation as a result of city action, yet preserve the ability of the city to lawfully regulate real property and fulfill its other duties and functions.
Actions by the city involving the physical taking or exaction of private real property is not a "constitutional taking" if the physical taking or exaction bears an essential nexus to a legitimate governmental interest and is roughly proportionate and reasonably related, on an individualized property basis, both in nature and extent, to the impact of the proposed development on the legitimate government interest.

11-4-2: GUIDELINES ADVISORY

The guidelines adopted and decisions rendered pursuant to the provisions of this chapter are advisory, and shall not be construed to expand or limit the scope of the city's liability for a constitutional taking. The reviewing body or person shall not be required to make any determination under this Title, except pursuant to CCNO 11-5-4.

11-4-3: REVIEW OF DECISION

Any owner of private real property who claims there has been a constitutional taking of his private real property may request a review of a final decision of any city officer, employee, board, commission or council. The following are specific procedures established for such a review:
1. Determination Received. The person requesting review must have obtained a final and authoritative determination, internally, within the city, relative to the decision from which they are requesting review.
2. Time Limit to File. Within thirty (30) days from the date of the final determination that gave rise to the concern that a constitutional taking has occurred, the person requesting the review shall file in writing, in the office of the city recorder, a request for review of that decision. A copy shall also be filed with the city attorney.
3. Review Scheduled. The City Council or an individual or body designated by the City Council, shall immediately set a time to review the decision that gave rise to the constitutional taking claim.
4. Information Required. In addition to the written request for review, the applicant must submit to the City Manager, prior to the date of review, the following:
  1. Name of applicant requesting review;
  2. Name and business address of current owner of the property, form of ownership, whether sole proprietorship, for profit or not for profit corporation, partnership, joint venture or other, and if owned by a corporation, partnership, or joint venture, name and address of all principal shareholders or partners;
  3. A detailed description of the grounds for the claim that there has been a constitutional taking;
  4. A detailed description of the property taken;
  5. Evidence and documentation as to the value of the property taken, including the date and cost as of the date the property was acquired. This should include any evidence of the value of that same property before and after the alleged constitutional taking, the name of the party from whom purchased, including the relationship, if any, between the person requesting a review and the party from whom the property was acquired;
  6. Nature of the protectable interest claimed to be affected (such as, but not limited to, fee simple ownership, leasehold interest);
  7. Terms (including sale price) of any previous purchase or sale of a full or partial interest in the property in the three (3) years prior to the date of application;
  8. All appraisals of the property prepared for any purpose, including financing, offering for sale, or ad valorem taxation, within the three (3) years prior to the date of application;
  9. The assessed value of and ad valorem taxes on the property for the previous three (3) years;
  10. All information concerning current mortgages or other loans secured by the property, including name of the mortgagee or lender, current interest rate, remaining loan balance and term of the loan and other significant provisions, including, but not limited to, right of purchasers to assume the loan;
  11. All listings of the property for sale or rent, price asked and offers received, if any, within the previous three (3) years;
  12. All studies commissioned by the petitioner or agents of the petitioner within the previous three (3) years concerning feasibility of development or utilization of the property;
  13. For income producing property, itemized income and expense statements from the property for the previous three (3) years;
  14. Information from a title policy or other source showing all recorded liens or encumbrances affecting the property; and
  15. Additional information reasonably necessary, in the opinion of the City Council, to arrive at a conclusion concerning whether there has been a constitutional taking.
5. Certification of Completeness. An application shall not be deemed to be "complete" or "submitted" until the city certifies to the applicant that all materials and information required above have been received by the city. The city shall promptly notify the applicant of any incomplete application.
6. Review. The City Council shall review all the evidence related to and submitted by the applicant, city or any other interested party, and may hold a hearing to aid in the review.
7. Final Decision. A final decision on the review shall be rendered within fourteen (14) days from the date the complete application for review has been received by the city. The final decision shall be given in writing to the applicant and City Council that rendered the final determination that gave rise to the request for review.
8. Failure to Decide. If the City Council fails to hear and decide the review within fourteen (14) days, the decision appealed from shall be presumed to be affirmed.

11-4-4: REVIEWING GUIDELINES

If the aggrieved private property owner chooses to follow this procedure, the City Council, shall review the facts and information presented by the applicant to determine whether or not the action by the city constitutes a "constitutional taking", as defined in this chapter. In doing so, they shall consider:
1. Whether the physical taking or exaction of the private real property bears an essential nexus to a legitimate governmental interest.
2. Whether a legitimate governmental interest exists for the action taken by the city.
3. Whether the property and exaction taken is roughly proportionate and reasonably related, on an individual property basis, both in nature and extent, to the impact caused by the activities that are the subject of the decision being reviewed.