CP&DR

Late Filing Doesn't Cure Missed Deadline In Water Meter Lawsuit

May 29, 2007

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Fresno County, Legal Digest, Vol. 22 No. 06 Jun 2007, Water

A California Environmental Quality Act lawsuit over the City of Fresno's move to metered water rates has been dismissed because attorneys missed a deadline.

Historic Preservation Advocates Lose Alameda Theatre Battle

May 29, 2007

Alameda County, CP&DR Staff, Historic preservation, Legal Digest, Vol. 22 No. 06 Jun 2007

The City of Alameda's approval of a development and disposition agreement (DDA) with a developer for restoration of an historic theater and construction of a new theater and parking structure was a "project" under the California Environmental Quality Act, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled. The ruling was a loss for historic preservation advocates who did not challenge the City of Alameda's environmental review of the DDA when the city approved the study.

Fresno Traffic Impact Policy Declared ‘Illegal'

May 29, 2007

CP&DR Staff, Fresno County, Legal Digest, Transportation, Vol. 22 No. 06 Jun 2007

The City of Fresno's policy of not requiring mitigations for developments' impact on state highways is illegal, according to the Fifth District Court of Appeal.

Exemption For Huntington Beach Nursery Grading Permit Upheld

May 7, 2007

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Orange County, Vol. 22 No. 05 May 2007

A grading permit for a nursery in Huntington Beach did not violate a six-year-old conditional use permit and was not subject to environmental review, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.

Court Upholds Gilroy's Plan Despite It's Lack Of Site-Specific Analyses

May 4, 2007

CP&DR Staff, Housing, Legal Digest, Santa Clara County, Vol. 22 No. 05 May 2007

A state appellate court has upheld the City of Gilroy's housing element against a challenge filed by affordable housing advocates. The court ruled that, under the housing element law in effect when Gilroy updated its housing plan in 2002, the city did not have to provide a site-specific inventory and analysis.

Builders, Administration Differ With Environmentalists On Species Review

May 4, 2007

Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, Kenneth Jost, Legal Digest, Vol. 22 No. 05 May 2007

WASHINGTON _ Home builders are hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that could broaden the impact of the federal Endangered Species Act on residential and commercial construction.

State High Court Hears Zoning, CEQA Cases

May 3, 2007

California, Legal Digest, Paul Shigley, Vol. 22 No. 05 May 2007, Zoning

LOS ANGELES _ The California Supreme Court has heard oral arguments in two unrelated land use cases that could have profound impacts for planners, developers and property owners.One case involves a City of Hanford zoning ordinance that restricts who may sell furniture; the second case concerns whether an airport land use compatibility plan is subject to environmental review. The court heard oral arguments in both cases on the same day in early April. Decisions are due by July 3.

Guaranteed Water Is Not Required, But Full Analysis And Disclosure Are

by Paul Shigley on Mar 1, 2007

Legal Digest, Vol. 22 No. 03 Mar 2007, Water

The water supply analysis for one of the largest housing developments ever approved in the Central Valley has been rejected by the state Supreme Court. The court faulted the water study in the environmental impact report for the 20,000-unit Sunrise-Douglas community plan outside Sacramento because the study did not adequately describe long-term water sources and the impacts of using those sources. >>read more

Feasibility Of Alternatives Questioned In Historic Home Preservation Ruling

by CP&DR Staff on Mar 1, 2007

Historic preservation, Legal Digest

A Superior Court decision prohibiting Apple Computer CEO Steve Jobs from demolishing an historic mansion in Woodside has been upheld by an appellate court. The court rejected the Town of Woodside's conclusion that repairing or adding onto the house were economically infeasible project alternatives to demolition and replacement. >>read more

Defendant In Eminent Domain Case Sells, Still Wins Litigation Expenses

Mar 1, 2007

CP&DR Staff, Eminent domain, Legal Digest, Los Angeles County, Vol. 22 No. 03 Mar 2007

An appellate court has ruled that a property owner that sold its property to a third party after the Temple City Redevelopment Agency had commenced eminent domain proceedings is entitled to litigation expenses.

Articles