Abstract
Transferable development rights programs, while they represent an important new means of land use regulation, are of unsettled constitutional validity. The recent decision of the New York Court of Appeals in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York upheld such a program restricting the development of the Grand Central Terminal property and granting its private owner nondollar compensation in the form of transferable development rights. In this Comment, Professor Costonis focuses on the doctrinal significance of this decision in forging a middle way of land use reguilation between the paths of police power and eminent domain.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
