In a case from Tiburon, an appellate court said future housing projects are not "reasonably foreseeable".

Seemingly since the invention of the elevator, critics of growth in California have warned of “Manhattanization,” as if the adoption of liberal zoning policies could instantly result in a thicket of high-density towers. Thus far, that fate has not befallen any cities. But due to a recent confluence of new laws and economic conditions, high-rises are being proposed, approved, and built in some unusual places.

The passage of AB 130 and SB 131 – the budget trailer bills from last summer – has shifted the landscape for planning in California in new ways. And although the impetus for these shifts came from the state’s desire to encourage more housing, there are pros and cons for both local governments and housing developers from the deal.

After a one-year hiatus, the Land Use Law and Planning Conference, sponsored for over 30 years by UCLA and now by the W. P. Carey Center for Real Estate and Finance at Arizona State Unviersity and the California Planning & Development Report, is returning to downtown Los Angeles Friday, January 23.

As the Legislature prepares to convene in January, another round of changes to the California Environmental Quality Act seems likely. The question is whether the 2026 changes will be incremental – clarifying, among other things, some of the “Swiss-cheese” holes punched in CEQA in 2025 – or whether someone in the Legislature will attempt a more comprehensive attempt at reform.