Articles

California's business community is accustomed to having its plans second-guessed by regulators seeking to determine whether a project or activity will harm birds, bugs, fish and plants. But a recent decision by the Coastal Commission appears to signal a dramatic shift in the state's regulatory environment, adding a global dimension to the list of potential impacts to be assessed.

The California Research Bureau has published a report outlining possible ways to increase public oversight of redevelopment. Read about the report and check out other blog entries by Paul Shigley and William Fulton at The Daily Shig.

For the first time, residents in a Ventura County city have voted to substantially expand their urban growth boundaries in order to accommodate a residential development.

Some 61% of Santa Paula residents voted on Tuesday, May 8, to expand the urban growth boundary by 4,800 acres to bring the Adams Canyon area inside the city's growth boundary. Measure A7 also directed the city to amend its general plan to permit about 500 houses, a resort hotel and golf course, and require at least 200 acres of passive open space.

It may not be the parting of the Red Sea, but the Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan is miracle enough. Sponsored by the Los Angeles River Committee of the Los Angeles City Council, the revitalization master plan may be the corner-turning event that actually kicks off the process of making a depressing culvert into a riparian green belt, studded with neighborhood parks, including several in the city's poorest neighborhoods.

A grading permit for a nursery in Huntington Beach did not violate a six-year-old conditional use permit and was not subject to environmental review, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.

Voters 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.

If anything has become clear during the months since voters approved a $19.9 billion transportation bond last November, it's that freeways are still king. The first $4.5 billion allocated by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) was aimed solely at roads, mostly for expanding freeway capacity. Another $3 billion for pavement — including $1 billion for Highway 99 — is scheduled for allocation by June.

For at least the third time in two years, litigation filed by housing advocates has resulted in a court order or settlement for hundreds of affordable housing units. The latest city to get hit with a judgment is Brea, whose redevelopment agency was ordered to produce 208 units of low- and very low-income housing by June 2012.

The City of Fresno's policy of not requiring mitigations for developments' impact on state highways is illegal, according to the Fifth District Court of Appeal.

Monterey County did not have to prepare an environmental impact report for a 28-lot subdivision in an area suffering from a severe groundwater overdraft, the Sixth District Court of Appeal has ruled.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a district court ruling that strikes down San Diego County's ordinance regulating the location and appearance of cell phone antennas and other wireless facilities.

A state appellate court has upheld the City of Gilroy's housing element against a challenge filed by affordable housing advocates. The court ruled that, under the housing element law in effect when Gilroy updated its housing plan in 2002, the city did not have to provide a site-specific inventory and analysis.

WASHINGTON _ Home builders are hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn a Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that could broaden the impact of the federal Endangered Species Act on residential and commercial construction.

LOS ANGELES _ The California Supreme Court has heard oral arguments in two unrelated land use cases that could have profound impacts for planners, developers and property owners.One case involves a City of Hanford zoning ordinance that restricts who may sell furniture; the second case concerns whether an airport land use compatibility plan is subject to environmental review. The court heard oral arguments in both cases on the same day in early April. Decisions are due by July 3.