Also known as: rough commensurate · approximately proportional · roughly proportional
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A constitutional standard requiring that government exactions demanding dedication of land or payment of money as conditions of development permits match in nature and extent the projected impacts of the proposed development. The government bears the burden of making an individualized showing of this fit.
Ravi Reddy seeks a permit to expand his hardware store by 5,000 square feet. The city conditions approval on Reddy dedicating a 30-foot strip along the entire frontage for a public greenway and bike path. The city's traffic study shows the expansion will add only twelve vehicle trips per day. A court invalidates the condition because the city failed to demonstrate that the scale of the demanded land matches the modest traffic impact created by the project.
Elena Vargas seeks a permit to build a 40-unit apartment complex. The city conditions approval on Vargas paying a $400,000 fee for off-site road widening. The city's traffic study shows the project will generate only 18 additional peak-hour trips. A court invalidates the fee because the city failed to demonstrate that the amount demanded is roughly commensurate with the modest traffic impact created by the project.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The government must make an individualized determination showing that the nature and extent of the exaction are roughly proportional to the projected impact of the development. Conclusory assertions or reliance on pre-existing plans are insufficient.
Supporting sources
No. The test also governs monetary exactions imposed as conditions of permit approval. When an applicant refuses a monetary demand and the permit is denied, the denial itself triggers takings scrutiny under the same framework.
Supporting sources
Essential nexus asks whether the condition bears a logical relationship to a legitimate public interest affected by the project. Rough proportionality asks whether the magnitude of the exaction matches the scale of the project's specific impacts.
Supporting sources
Evidence that the demanded dedication advances a pre-existing municipal plan, exceeds the city's own impact studies, or imposes costs several times larger than the project's documented effects demonstrates a failure of rough proportionality.
Supporting sources
…of § 6 (b) (5), requires the Agency to quantify both the costs and the benefits of a proposed rule and to conclude that they are roughly commensurate. In our view, it is not necessary to decide whether either the Government or industry is entirely correct. For we think it is clear that § 3 (8) does apply to all permanent standards…