So it was purely a 5th Amendment/public use case.
I read the decision, and skimmed Justice Thomas's dissent, and he has the right of it in my opinion. The plain reading of the 5th Amendment and Thomas's research on the history are far more convincing than the majority opinion's reliance on stare decisis.
There is now virtually no limit on the power of eminent domain. It appears from the majority opinion that those five justices would even be willing to entertain the notion of crossing the "bright line" of taking directly from person A to person B might even be acceptable.