Also known as:phase out · phaseout · phases out · phased out · phasing out · phaseouts
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
in property law
A period granted under a zoning ordinance during which an owner may continue a nonconforming use before it must cease. Reasonableness turns on the nature of the use, the owner's investment, and the length of time allowed. The device limits protection of preexisting property rights without amounting to an uncompensated taking.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
2
Landfill Closure Timeline
GreenEarth Waste Services has run an open landfill for thirty years on land now rezoned as a groundwater protection zone. The new ordinance bars the use but grants nine years of continued operation before mandatory closure. GreenEarth sues, claiming the phase-out effects a taking. The court upholds the ordinance because the nine-year window supplies a reasonable opportunity to recoup investment given the scale of the facility and the public interest in aquifer protection.
Mobile Home Park Wind-Down
Northern Realty has operated a mobile home park for forty years on land rezoned for high-density commercial use. The ordinance requires cessation after eight years and supplies no compensation. Northern Realty sues, arguing the period is too short to recover infrastructure costs. The court finds the phase-out reasonable because the park's long prior operation and the movable character of the units allow adequate recoupment within the allotted time.
Put it into practice
Test Yourself
10
Practice Questions5
· 1 primary source
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Common Law
Study Supplements
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
What factors determine whether an amortization period is reasonable?+
Courts examine the nature and expected life of the use, the owner's sunk costs, the ability to recoup those costs during the period, and the impact on affected occupants or tenants. A period that affords a fair opportunity to recover investment and plan for transition is typically upheld. Periods that render the investment effectively worthless without realistic wind-down time are more likely to be struck down as takings.
Supporting sources
Does a phase-out period always require compensation to the owner?+
No. Amortization is a recognized limit on protection of preexisting nonconforming uses that does not automatically trigger just compensation. Compensation becomes necessary only when the period is so short that it amounts to a taking. Reasonable periods that allow recoupment of investment are treated as valid exercises of the police power.
Supporting sources
Can an owner lose the right to continue a nonconforming use before the amortization period ends?+
Yes. The right may still be lost through voluntary abandonment, discontinuance for the statutory period, or destruction of the premises, even if an amortization ordinance is in place. Involuntary closures, such as those compelled by pandemic orders, generally do not extinguish the vested right.
Supporting sources
Real PropertyRights in real property · Zoning (fundamentals other than regulatory taking)UBEFoundational