Solano County
27th Annual* *Land Use Law & Planning Conference Attendees, contact the Circulation Manager to access your special discount! 805-652-0695 or email sklipp@cp-dr.com!
Suisun City Redevelopment Advances Into Second Phase
By Paul Shigley on 15 July 2009 - 2:20pmTen years ago, Suisun City was one of the nation’s great redevelopment success stories. Plagued by violent, drug-dealing gangs, it literally bulldozed their strongholds to make room for a fancy civic center. The city reclaimed its neglected waterfront and approved the construction of hundreds of homes in a traditional neighborhood development.
The Solano County city became a case study for planners, new urbanists and journalists. But all the success and awards have not lessened a feeling that Suisun City’s redevelopment still has a long ways to go.
Another Antiquated Subdivision Map Rejected
By Paul Shigley on 23 April 2009 - 10:33amIn the third decision in an emerging line of cases regarding antiquated subdivisions, an appellate court has refused to recognize the legality of a parcel shown on a 1909 subdivision map. The First District Court of Appeal ruled the Solano County map did not satisfy the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act’s grandfather clause because the law in effect in 1909 did not address the “design and improvement” of subdivisions.
Air Base Compatibility Plan Upheld Over Developer's Objection
By Paul Shigley on 4 September 2008 - 1:07pmAn appellate court has upheld an airport land use compatibility plan that a Solano County landowner argued was overly restrictive.
The court rejected the landowner’s contention that Solano County’s Travis Air Force Base Land Use Compatibility Plan (TALUP) was inconsistent with an Air Force plan because the TALUP used a tighter noise threshold and assumed greater airport use than did the Air Force. The court found nothing in state law that prevented the country from being more restrictive of growth around an airport.
Court Defers On General Plan, Density Bonuses
By William Fulton on 24 September 2007 - 12:55pmIn a decision deferential to city officials, an appellate court has upheld the City of Vacaville’s approval of an 860-acre project as compatible with the general plan. The decision also provides the first published ruling on the recently amended state density bonus law, which the court applies very broadly.
CEQA Exemption Is 'Common Sense,' Says High Court
By Paul Shigley on 22 June 2007 - 4:37pmThe California Supreme Court has ruled that an airport land use compatibility plan qualifies for a “common sense” exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act.
Perhaps more importantly, the court opened the door for the first time to the idea that displacement of development — often an arguable consequence of a plan that favors one type of development over another — might be an issue that should be analyzed under CEQA.
Sierra Madre, Dixon Voters Say 'No' To Development
By Urban Insight on 7 May 2007 - 3:21pmVoters in two small towns rejected development during special elections in April. Voters in the San Gabriel Valley city of Sierra Madre approved a referendum that requires projects of a certain size in downtown to go before voters. Meanwhile, voters in the Solano County city of Dixon rejected a proposed horse track and entertainment facility.
Both elections were close, and the land use battles in both cities appear far from over. The balloting may provide cautionary tales for planners, as both elections occurred after lengthy planning processes.
Proposed Horse Track Goes Before Dixon Voters
By Urban Insight on 1 March 2007 - 1:00amVoters in the northern Solano County city of Dixon will decide in April on a project that could change the nature of town: A horse racing track and entertainment center capable of handling events for up to 50,000 people, plus more than 1 million square feet of hotel, entertainment, retail and office development.
State High Court Rejects Pre-1893 Subdivisions
1 March 2003 - 1:00amIn its first ruling directly addressing the validity of "antiquated subdivisions," the California Supreme Court has held that maps recorded prior to adoption of the first precursor to the Subdivision Map Act in 1893 do not create legal parcels for today’s purposes.