The Third District Court of Appeal published an important new case on September 16, 2020—Parkford Owners for a Better Community v. County of Placer, __ Cal.App.5th __ (2020) (Case No. C087824)—holding that a project opponent’s challenge to the expansion of
Land Use Developments
The Land Use Developments blog, published by Miller Starr Regalia, focuses on legal issues surrounding real estate development and land use in California. It covers topics such as housing project approvals, challenges under the Housing Accountability Act, California Environmental Quality Act litigation, zoning and planning law compliance, and local government permitting processes. The blog discusses significant cases involving affordable housing projects, legislative updates affecting land use and housing development, and strategies to navigate regulatory and litigation challenges in real estate development. It also addresses the impact of local opposition groups and legal mechanisms to promote housing production.
Latest from Land Use Developments - Page 4
Court Holds That County’s Abandonment of Public Road Easement Rights Did Not Violate Brown Act, Was Supported by Substantial Evidence, and Did Not Create Takings Liability
On August 17, 2020, in Martis Camp Community Association v. County of Placer, __ Cal.App.5th __ (2020) (Case Nos. C087759 and C087778), the Third District Court of Appeal addressed several novel legal claims arising from the County of Placer’s partial…
Court Holds That Dispensary’s Violation of County Marijuana Cultivation Ordinance Does Not Justify Seizure of Plants But Rejects Related Takings Claim
On August 5, 2020, in Granny Purps, Inc. v. County of Santa Cruz, __ Cal.App.5th __ (2020) (Case No. H045387), the Sixth District Court of Appeal addressed several novel property rights issues related to a law enforcement action in the…
Court Holds That Subdivider’s Challenge to County’s Interpretation of Vesting Tentative Map Conditions of Approval May be Filed Beyond 90-Day Statute of Limitations Period
California’s statues of limitations in land use cases are notoriously short and harsh and don’t often result in outcomes favorable to aggrieved applicants. Exceptions such as Honchariw v. County of Stanislaus, __ Cal.App.5th __ (2020) (Case No. F077815) (i.e., Honchariw…
Court Rules in Favor of Landowner in Eminent Domain Case Where City Did Not Use Condemned Property for its Intended Public Use Within 10 Years
Every once in a while a case comes along that calls to mind the adage that “just because you can think it doesn’t mean you should say it.” The Second District Court of Appeal’s July 30, 2020 eminent domain decision…
Development Agreement Allowed City to Impose New Fees on Housing Project Despite Previously Approved Vesting Tentative Map
In a new case published on June 8, 2020, North Murrieta Community, LLC v. City of Murrieta, __ Cal.App.5th __ (2020) (Case No. E072663), the Fourth District Court of Appeal addressed novel vested rights issues arising under both the Subdivision…
Court Invalidates City’s Denial of Conditional Use Permit Because Councilmember’s Pre-Hearing Actions Demonstrated Bias
In an important new case certified for publication on May 8, 2020, Petrovich Development Company, LLC v. City of Sacramento, __ Cal.App.5th __ (2020) (Case No. C087283), the Third District Court of Appeal addressed the constitutional due process restraints imposed…
New Bay Area Shelter-in-Place Orders Ease Rules, Allow All Construction to Resume Operations
Construction projects of every type in six Bay area counties—Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara—may resume operations on Monday, May 4, after health officers in six counties issued…
Alameda County Public Health Department Pulls Rank on Oakland, Highlights Arbitrary Treatment of Construction Under Shelter-in-Place Orders
San Francisco Asserts Sweeping Power “To Take Any Measure Necessary” to Prevent Spread of COVID-19
Without a single mention of the U.S. or California constitutions, the San Francisco city attorney’s office issued an April 13, 2020 memo declaring that the City may “take any measure necessary to prevent the spread of an infectious disease.”…