[alistairSH]

Do you have a link to a summary? I missed it, if it ever made the front page news.

IANAdeveloper… if a developer is otherwise within code/zoning, SCOTUS is probably correct. If they’re asking for zoning changes, there should be room for negotiation on nearby improvements.

[voisin]

> If they’re asking for zoning changes, there should be room for negotiation on nearby improvements.

The problem is that in many areas (of Canada at least), zoning bylaws are horribly outdated and inconsistent with municipal priorities. But municipalities don’t have an incentive to change them because if they allow things to be done “as of right” with modern zoning, they can’t shake down developers to fund their pet projects. So everything is a negotiation, which again adds uncertainty and cost.

Governments need to get out of the way and let developers build, or accept that they are the source of the housing scarcity.

[AnthonyMouse]

The takings clause was ratified in 1791. Unless the current zoning restrictions predate that, there is an element of cheating to imposing a restriction and then "negotiating" to remove it in exchange for something that would otherwise be a taking.

[carbocation]

News article about it: https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/supreme-court-ruli...

[BenFranklin100]

This is the ruling, thanks.