1. SECOND SET OF LAND USE ASSIGNMENTS 391 (STARTING WITH CAMPSEN)—465 (UP TO FLORIDA LAND USE AND ENVTL. DISPUTE RESOLUTION ACT) 479-503 (UP TO SECTION “E”) POSTED ON WEB SITE

2. SUMMARY OF CLASS FINISHED PENN COAL COMPARING HOLMES AND BRANDEIS PHYSICAL TAKINGS: LORETTO PENN CENTRAL: THE THEORETICAL DILEMMA FOR THE PS: DEALING WITH EUCLID THE PLAINTIFFS FOUR ARGUMENTS MULTI-FACTOR BALANCING TEST

3. SUMMARY (CONT.) LUCAS: DEFINING THE PER SE CATEGORIES: (1) PHYSICAL TAKINGS (2) ALL ECONOMIC USE THE EXCEPTION DISTINGUISHING THE NOXIOUS USE CASES: NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN BENEFIT-CONFERRING AND HARM- PREVENTING

4. EXCEPTIONS TO CATEGORICAL TAKINGS RULE EXCEPTION: PROSCRIBED USES (BY REGULATION) WERE NOT PART OF TITLE TO BEGIN WITH EXAMPLE: NUISANCE FACTORS APPLIED: WILL SOUTH CAROLINA REGULATION FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY?

5. EXTENDING LUCAS? TAHOE-SIERRA THE MORATORIA IN QUESTION PURPOSE LENGTH PURPOSE OF BI-STATE COMPACT DANGER TO LAKE TAHOE

6. TAHOE-SIERRA: THE PS ARGUMENT THE PER SE TAKING ARGUMENT --FACIAL ATTACK --TEMPORAL SEGMENTATION --RELATION TO PREVIOUS CASES: 1. PENN CENTRAL 2. LEASEHOLD CASES 3. PHYSICAL TAKINGS: LORETTO 4. LUCAS

7. THE HOLDING IN TAHOE-SIERRA REFUSAL TO APPLY PER SE RULE 1. PHYSICAL v. REGULATORY TAKINGS 2. LOOK AT “PARCEL AS A WHOLE” 3. DISTINGUISH LUCAS: FEE SIMPLE 4. EFFECT ON PLANNING PROCESS 5. CAN’T DISTINGUISH PERMIT DELAY APPLYING PENN CENTRAL MORE THAN ONE YEAR DOUBTFUL?

8. THE DENOMINATOR ISSUE: PALM BEACH ISLES ASSOCIATES KEY FACTS: 1.1956: bought 311.7 acres for $380,190 2.1968: sold 261 acres east for $1 million 3.Remaining 50.7 acres: 49.3 submerted 4.1957: federal fill permit; expired 5.1988: apply to DER for permit; denied Suit and settlement 6.Corps of Engineers denies fill permit

9. THE DENOMINATOR ISSUE WHAT THE ISSUE IS PERCENTAGE OF PROPERTY TAKEN NUMERATOR (TAKEN) OVER DENOMINATOR (ENTIRE PROPERTY) WHY IT’S SO IMPORTANT LUCAS OR PENN CENTRAL

10. FACTORS IN RESOLVING DENOMINATOR ISSUE LOVELADIES: FLEXIBLE APPROACH THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT FACTUAL NUANCES FACTORS: 1 TIMING OF PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT 2 ENACTMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF GOVERNMENTAL REGIMEN

11. PALM BEACH POSITIONS GOVERNMENT: (1) LAND PURCHASED TOGETHER; (2) CAN’T SEVER PART SUBJECT TO REGULATION FROM REST PBIA: (1) NO COMMON DEVELOPMENT SCHEME (2) SEPARATED BY ROAD (2) DIFFERENT ZONING (4) NO UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT PLANNED (5) OCEAN SOLD BEFORE GOVT REGULATION

12. HOLDING IN PALM BEACH 1. 50.7 ACRES IS RELEVANT PARCEL 2.NO ECONOMIC VALUE 3.SO, TAKING UNLESS 4.NAVIGATIONAL SERVITUDE (BUT SCOPE OF SERVITUDE IS CRITICAL)

13. REMEDY: FIRST ENGLISH AGINS RULE: NO TAKING UNTIL GOVERNMENT DECIDES TO MAKE REGULATION PERMANENT RATIONALE: CAN’T FORCE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE PROPERTY FIRST ENGLISH: PROPERTY HAS BEEN TAKEN (“TEMPORARY TAKING” FOR THAT PERIOD)

14. REMEDY (CONT.) GOVERNMENT’S OPTIONS AT TIME OF FINDING OF TAKING: 1. KEEP REGULATION IN PLACE AND TAKE ENTIRE PROPERTY 2. RESCIND REGULATION AND PAY FOR TEMPORARY TAKING (NOTE LINK TO ARGUMENTS IN TAHOE-SIERRA, WHICH CAME LATER)

15. SUMMARY OF TAKINGS 1.CATEGORICAL TAKINGS: PHYSICAL OCCUPATION AND ALL ECONOMIC USE “NUISANCE” EXCEPTION--LUCAS 2.FEES: NOLLAN AND DOLAN 3.GENERAL REGULATORY TAKINGS: PENN CENTRAL (AND PENN COAL) DENOMINATOR ISSUE: PALM BEACH 4.REMEDIES: FIRST ENGLISH