Different can of worms - eminent domain has always been written into the constitution. Government has ultimate right of land so long as they can show just cause and pay fair use for it. Kind of odd if you think of it as a conflict with the 4th amendment but also a necessary bureaucratic evil for things like military bases, government buildings, etc)
And, as always, ripe for abuse.
Many locales aren’t ‘taking’ the property, they’re choosing to re-zone it. The courts make it hard to prove you’ve suffered a financial loss by re-zoning. The favorite is changing from residential to conservation by lowering the altitude above which the land is considered conservation property.
Eminent domain also requires compensation for the taking of your private property for government use.
Zoning offer no compensation for the taking of your property through the acts of zoning. Lets say you have 30 acres of land and the current zoning allows for 30 homes to be built on that land. However the town changes that zoning from 1 acre per house to 5 acres per house, now you can only build 6 homes on that land. Now your land is less valuable because you can’t build 30 houses. Does the government compensate the land owner for the drastic lost of value? Nope
Explain how that is constitutional?