In Kelo v. New London (2005) 545 U.S. 469, the City of London, Connecticut, adopted an extensive redevelopment plan to revitalize its economically distressed downtown and waterfront areas, "particularly its Fort Trumbull area," to raise tax and other revenues and "to make the City more attractive and to create leisure and recreational opportunities on the waterfront and in a park." (Id. at pp. 473-475.) Owners of 15 properties in Fort Trumbull challenged the taking of their properties as violative of the "public purpose" restriction of the Fifth Amendment of the federal Constitution. "There is no allegation that any of these properties is blighted or otherwise in poor condition; rather, they were condemned only because they happen to be located in the development area." (Id. at p. 475.) The United States Supreme Court rejected their claims, reasoning: "Given the comprehensive character of the plan, the thorough deliberation that preceded its adoption, and the limited scope of our review, it is appropriate for us, as it was in Berman, to resolve the challenges of the individual owners, not on a piecemeal basis, but rather in light of the entire plan. Because that plan unquestionably serves a public purpose, the takings challenged here satisfy the public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment." (Id. at p. 484.)