Search Results
Search this site
5061 results found with an empty search
- Bias Councilmember Should Not Have Been Permitted to Appeal Permit Decision, Court Rules
The City of Newport Beach improperly permitted a councilmember who was openly opposed to a bar's permit to appeal the planning commission's decision granting the permit and to vote on the permit appeal, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled. The appellate court also ruled that the trial court should not have granted the city a preliminary injunction to block the bar from operating under the permit approved by the planning commission.
- County Can't Undermine Dispensary Referendum, Court Rules
In repealing a medical marijuana ordinance that a referendum sought to overturn, the Kern County Board of Supervisors erred in also repealing the underlying ordinance that the referendum's backers were seeking to reinstate, the Fifth District Court of Appeal has ruled. It's the third appellate ruling in a medical marijuana zoning case to be issued in the last month.
- Courts Can Withhold Disputed Redevelopment Funds
funds as part of a redevelopment dispute even though a previous ruling concluded that the state cannot.
- State "Incentives" To Charter Cities To Use Prevailing Wage Struck Down
A state law that prohibits charter cities from receiving state funds for a public construction project if it allows the contractors to not pay prevailing wage has been upheld by a split appellate court.
- Carson May Deny Mobile Home Subdivision Based on General Plan Inconsistency, Court Rules
In a split decision, the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled that the City of Carson acted properly in denying the subdivision of a mobile home park because this change in ownership structure was inconsistent with the general plan by placing at risk wetlands within the park, which were reclaimed from contaminated oil friends and are called out in the open space element of the city's general plan.
- Fish & Wildlife Created Physical Taking In Flooding Del Norte Subdivision
In a 61-page opinion, the Third District Court of Appeal has ruled that the Department of Fish & Wildlife's actions in managing coastal flooding around Lake Tolowa and Lake Earl in Del Norte County constituted a physical taking of the adjacent landowners' property.
- Time To Tackle California's Housing Problem
The recent Brexit vote seemed a lot like the typical California NIMBY fight to me: Basically, a whole bunch of old white people who don’t like how society is evolving tried to shut the door, probably screwing their own children and grandchildren in the process.
- Legal Briefs
Expanding Printing Operation OK As CEQA Baseline
- Forward Into The Past
Writing recently in Voice of San Diego , Maya Srikrishnan has documented what might be called – at least from my wizened perspective – the return of the coastal Southern California anti-growth initiative. In Del Mar, Costa Mesa, and Santa Monica – one coastal town in each SoCal coastal county – citizens have placed initiatives on this fall’s ballot to slow down growth or at least require that major projects must go before voters.
- Presidio Trust Didn't Violate Historic Preservation Law In Planning New Development, Ninth Circuit Rules
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that The Presidio Trust can move forward with the construction of a 12-building complex commonly referred to as a "lodge" in the vicinity of the Main Parade Ground. In so doing, the court rejected arguments from the Sierra Club and a variety of historic preservation organizations that doing so would violate the Presidio Trust Act. The court also rejected the argument that the Presidio Trust's actions did not meet the consultation requirements contained in Section 110f of the National Historic Preservation Act.
- Elimination of Minimum Housing Densities Not Exempt From CEQA
Overturning the decision of a trial judge, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled that the City of Palm Springs’s decision to eliminate minimum residential densities from its general plan is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.
- There Was No Way the Builders Were Going to Win the San Jose Case
Yesterday's landmark ruling by the California Supreme Court upholding San Jose's inclusionary housing ordinance was rightly hailed as a huge victory for affordable housing advocates. But the truth is that the ruling shouldn't be viewed as a surprise. It was a very difficult case for the building industry to win - at least the way the industry's lawyers has set the case up.
