CP&DR

University Off the Hook for Traffic, Fire Impacts

Aug 1, 2003

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Vol. 18 No. 08 Aug 2003

California State University is not required to fund mitigation measures that offset a new campus's traffic and fire safety impacts, the Sixth District Court of Appeal has ruled.

Rent Control Board Lawsuit Against Landlord Can Proceed

Aug 1, 2003

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Vol. 18 No. 08 Aug 2003

An appellate court has reinstated a Santa Monica Rent Control Board lawsuit against a landlord that a trial court had dismissed as a SLAPP suit. The lawsuit was the board's legitimate attempt to get a judicial determination that the landlord was violating local rent control laws, the Second District Court of Appeal ruled.

Water Analysis for UC Merced Campus Withstands Challenge

Aug 1, 2003

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Vol. 18 No. 08 Aug 2003

The Fifth District Court of Appeal has upheld an environmental impact report's water analysis for the proposed University of California, Merced, campus.

City's Hearing Rejected For Violating Adult Business Owners' Due Process Rights

Jul 1, 2003

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Vol. 18 No. 07 Jul 2003

An administrative hearing that the City of Beverly Hills conducted for an adult business permit renewal violated the business's right to due process, the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled. The problem was that a city attorney — who earlier had contended that the business failed to submit a complete permit renewal application — also advised the hearing officer who considered the business's appeal of the decision to deny the renewal application.

Housing Developer Loses Rancho Cucamonga Fee Case

Jul 1, 2003

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Vol. 18 No. 07 Jul 2003

A Southern California housing developer that has aggressively fought a wide variety of government fees in recent years has lost a building permit and plan review fee case at the Fourth District Court of Appeal. In a terse opinion, the unanimous three-judge appellate panel ruled that Barratt American's claims were either time-barred or attempted to rely on the wrong statutes.

Hawaiian Gardens Shop Owner Allowed To Continue Inverse Condemnation Litigation

Jul 1, 2003

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Vol. 18 No. 07 Jul 2003

The California Supreme Court has ordered the publication of another round in the litigation involving a doughnut shop owner and the City of Hawaiian Gardens.

Riverside County Integrated Planning Effort Moves Forward

Jul 1, 2003

CP&DR Staff, In Brief, Vol. 18 No. 07 Jul 2003

Riverside County supervisors have approved two-thirds of the closely watched Riverside County Integrated Program (RCIP). In June, supervisors approved a new general plan and a multi-species conservation plan for the western third of the county.

EIR For Russian River Water Plan Struck Down

Jul 1, 2003

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Vol. 18 No. 07 Jul 2003

The Sonoma County Water Agency's environmental impact report for a project to increase the agency's withdrawals from the Russian River has been thrown out by the First District Court of Appeal. The EIR's analysis of cumulative impacts and project alternatives, and the document's description of the environmental setting were all inadequate, the court ruled.

City Crackdown On Long-Term Motel Rentals Is Ruled Constitutional

Jul 1, 2003

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Vol. 18 No. 07 Jul 2003

The City of Buena Park has successfully defended a lawsuit against city ordinances that prohibit long-term occupancy of motel rooms. The Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled that the ordinances were not unconstitutional takings and did not deprive the motel owners of equal protection.

Hearing Delay Causes Coastal Commission To Lose Jurisdiction Over Project

Jul 1, 2003

Coastal development, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, San Diego County, Vol. 18 No. 07 Jul 2003

The California Coastal Commission lost its jurisdiction over development of a proposed elementary school in Encinitas because the Commission did not determine within 49 days whether a "substantial issue" existed, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled. The ruling appears to knock down a practice in which the Commission within 49 days of receiving an appeal sets a later hearing date without addressing any of the issues.

Articles