Public Restrictions on Ownership

Public restrictions on ownership differ from private restrictions in that they are administered by the government, as opposed to private entities. Public restrictions tend to be more burdensome simply because they are regulated by the government and there are not many options for recourse. Some examples of public restrictions include eminent domain, building codes, and mandatory dedication. Eminent domain is the right of the government to take private property for public use upon the payment of just compensation. This is an extremely controversial restriction for many reasons. One big reason is that history has shown that if the government wants a piece of land badly enough for a public project, there's really not anything the landowner can do to stop them from condemning it. Another reason is that it is up to the government to determine what "just" compensation will be. More often than not, the compensation is far below what the landowner believes to be the value of the property. Below is a link to a news segment regarding a case of eminent domain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S7eUzHIcmA

As shown in this news story, there are many problems people face with eminent domain. In this particular case, the government offered William Lieberth compensation he claims he would be able to gross in just two years of operation at his shop. It is also very apparent that aside from the financial distress, he is facing emotional distress due to the change eminent domain has caused in his community and the history he would lose if his body shop is condemned. Mr. Lieberth will try to fight this in court, but unfortunately his chances of winning against the government are near to none.

Building codes are another public restriction that control the design, materials, and methods of construction, and compliance with them within their jurisdiction is mandatory. The reason for building codes is to protect public health and safety by setting a minimum standard for building construction. The government enforces building codes by requiring various permits, field inspections at various stages of construction, and test reports, among other things. Conformity with the building codes is primarily the responsibility of the design professional. The General Contractor is under legal obligation to notify the owner or design professional of any deviation from the requirements of the building code that come to his attention. A recent trend in new building codes that has come about in the last few years deals with the "green" construction of buildings. Below is a news segment on the subject:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWTRHhPZl58

Code writers are now focusing more of their efforts toward this idea of "green" construction. The first version of the International Green Construction Code (IGCC) was created by code writers at the beginning of 2010, who hope that the code will eventually be adopted by all local governments. The code would govern everything from the materials used in construction, waste produced, how energy is consumed, what is done with water, the lighting used, and even what land the building can be constructed on. This is all in an attempt to make the commercial structures of the future more sustainable. I admire the attempt at sustainability, but feel that the regulation may be too unrealistic and burdensome to American businesses.

Another public restriction is mandatory dedication. With mandatory dedication, the government requires the developer to dedicate parts of the property to public uses. It has been widely used by local governments as a means for providing park land and is a development requirement that has generally been upheld by the courts. This requirement I believe has good intentions for providing nice landscape for the community, however it burdens developers both with extra costs and more difficult construction planning.