The state Supreme Court will hear a case involving a county's ability to regulate a water district's construction of a water treatment plant.
Earlier this year, the Sixth District Court of Appeal ruled that a Government Code exemption to local zoning for "facilities for the production, generation, storage or transmission of water" did not extend to a water treatment plant. The court held that if the Legislature wanted to exempt water treatment plants from local zoning, it could have specified them in the statute (see CP&DR Legal Digest, April 2002).
The ruling came in a case in which a homeowners association sought to prevent the Soquel Creek Water District from building a water treatment plant in a residential subdivision.
The ruling drew the attention of special districts, cities and counties around the state. All seven state Supreme Court justices voted to hear the case. A date for oral arguments has not been set yet.
The case is Topsail Court Homeowners Association v. County of Santa Cruz, No. S104952.
A garbage company can challenge the environmental review of a competitor's proposed trash processing facility because the garbage company was enforcing a public duty of a local government, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.
A city resolution restricting parking on certain residential streets to residents with parking permits was categorically exempt from environmental review, the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled.
An exemption to the California Environmental Quality Act for construction of a sea wall below two houses has been upheld by the Fourth District Court of Appeal. The court ruled that the potential collapse of a bluff could threaten public safety and qualified for an emergency exemption under CEQA.
In a case that touched on redevelopment law, the California Environmental Quality Act and general plan compatibility, an appellate court has upheld San Francisco's handling of a project on the site of the historic Emporium department store.
The City of Los Angeles was correct to treat as one project a builder's various proposals for 21 new houses on existing parcels on two streets, the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled. The court rejected the builder's contention that the city could not demand an environmental impact report on the 21 houses, five of which have already been built.
Opponents of a proposed recycling center were too late in filing a lawsuit regarding a city's failure to prepare an environmental study on the city's sale of land to the recycling company, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.
When a public agency acquires a property via eminent domain, only a trial court judge -- and not a jury -- can decide whether a business should receive compensation for loss of goodwill, a state appellate court has ruled.
The California Coastal Commission's decision to allow Malibu property owners who are building new houses to exchange existing public view corridors on their property for dedication of an off-site public access to the beach has been upheld by the Second District Court of Appeal.