IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rppexx/v29y2014i3p275-300.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Property rights and coastal protection: the case of Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council

Author

Listed:
  • Rebecca Retzlaff
  • Sarah Sisser

Abstract

In 1986, David Lucas purchased two oceanfront lots on the Isle of Palms, South Carolina. Before he built on the lots, the South Carolina Legislature passed the Beachfront Management Act, restricting development along the coast. Unable to build a permanent structure on his property, Lucas sued the South Carolina Coastal Council. The case made its way to the US Supreme Court, and became one of the most significant cases in US planning history. This article situates the case in the context of the history of real property rights, chronicles the events leading up to the case, follows the case through the court system, and analyses its impact on planning practice. Although the case had less significant implications for planning than originally anticipated, it does carry important lessons for land-use planning, subdivision regulation, and planning in sensitive environmental areas. It was a defining moment for coastal conservation in the USA, and had a significant impact on implementation of the US Coastal Zone Management Act, which has been used as a model internationally.

Suggested Citation

  • Rebecca Retzlaff & Sarah Sisser, 2014. "Property rights and coastal protection: the case of Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council," Planning Perspectives, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 275-300, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rppexx:v:29:y:2014:i:3:p:275-300
    DOI: 10.1080/02665433.2013.829391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/02665433.2013.829391
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/02665433.2013.829391?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rppexx:v:29:y:2014:i:3:p:275-300. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rppe20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.