The California Supreme Court has accepted a second case involving the application of coastal zone requirements. In January, the court voted to review a case in which the Second District Court of Appeal ruled that a state law requiring coastal zone developers to provide affordable units did not apply to a project in which all new houses would be located outside the zone. The state high court put the issue this way: "Does the term ‘housing development' — for purposes of the Mello Act requirement that a developer provide affordable housing, where feasible, when a new housing development is constructed within the coastal zone subject to the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission (Government Code § 65590) — refer only to the actual housing component of a project, or is the Mello Act applicable if some aspects of the project are in the coastal zone even if all of the actual housing is to be constructed outside the coastal zone?" The Second District Court of Appeal answered that question in the negative. In a 2-1 ruling, the court held that developers of a 114-lot project in Los Angeles did not have to comply with the Mello Act's affordable housing mandate (see CP&DR Legal Digest, November 2003). Although the coastal zone boundary splits the 45-acre project site, the only portions of the development inside the coastal zone would be a road, utilities and erosion control facilities. The case is Coalition of Concerned Communities v. City of Los Angeles, No. S119897. Last year, the Supreme Court voted to review a separate case involving the same project. In that case, the Second District held that the Coastal Commission could not consider the environmental impacts to areas inside that coastal zone that result from development of the proposed houses outside the zone. That case is Sierra Club v. California Coastal Commission, No. S116081.