top of page

Search Results

Search this site

5023 results found with an empty search

  • 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.

  • Insight: Will Upland Ruling Allow Stadiums -- And Others -- Evade Two-Thirds Vote?

    So, why does a court ruling on a medical marijuana ban in Upland affect the Chargers ability to build a new stadium in San Diego?

  • State's Economic Strategy Pinches Pennies, Ignores Dollars

    Despite a budget deficit so large that it triggered the first gubernatorial recall in California history, the administration of Gov. Gray Davis has shown scant interest in stimulating the economy. But with the chaos in Sacramento – and the fact that elected officials have a smaller and smaller role to play in actually shaping the state’s budget – it may be that no California governor can devise an effective economic development strategy.

  • First District Orders Cal State East Bay to Reconsider Offsite Traffic Mitigation

    In light of a similar ruling by the California Supreme Court in a case from San Diego, the First District Court of Appeal has ordered Cal State East Bay to revisit the question of offsite traffic mitigation in the environmental impact report for its long-range master plan. As the Supreme Court did in San Diego, the court ruled that Cal State cannot simply declare mitigations infeasible unless the state legislature appropriates funds specifically for that purpose.

  • County Can't Recapture Money Loaned to Redevelopment Agency, Court Rules

    San Bernardino County is not entitled to the return of $9 million in loan principal to the former county redevelopment agency, even though the funds were not tax-increment revenues and had come from the county's general fund, the Third District Court of Appeal ruled Monday.

  • Groundwater Pump Charges Not Subject To Propositions 13 and 26, Court Rules

    United Water Conservation District may charge urban water users higher groundwater pumping fees than agricultural users, the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled. The court concluded that the fees are not property-based and therefore not subject to Proposition 13. In addition, the court concluded that the pumping fees fall under one of Proposition 26's exceptions, saying that the pump fees represent "payor-specific benefits" not subject to Prop. 26's requirements.

  • Deviation From PUD Zoning Deserves an EIR, Court Rules

    The environmental review for a proposed Sacramento housing project that apparently conflicted with planned unit development zoning for the site was inadequate, an appellate court has ruled. Instead of adopting a mitigated negative declaration, the City of Sacramento should have prepared an environmental impact report that addressed the conflict between the project and the PUD's objectives, the court ruled.

  • Simplicity Triumphs in Pershing Square Design Competition

    Rarely does anything with a lawn, a photovoltaic canopy, a “great lawn," no fewer than 13 design collaborators, and an estimated $50 million budget, qualify as simple. But, relative to its competitors, that’s exactly what the winning design in the Pershing Square Renew competition is.

  • Appellate Court Upholds Coastal Commission's Tough Stance on Encinitas Seawall

    In a split decision, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has upheld the Coastal Commission's conditions on two property owners' reconstruction of a seawall in Encinitas after it was destroyed in a storm, including limiting the new seawall's permit to a 20-year term.

  • Santa Clara Water Pump Charge Didn't Violate Prop. 218, Court Rules

    In a case that would appear on its face to conflict with a different appellate ruling filed just two weeks ago, the Sixth District Court of Appeal has ruled that a groundwater pump charge is a property-related charge subject to Proposition 218.

  • Overflight Easement Not A Taking, First District Rules

    The First District Court of Appeal has argued that Humbolt County did not create a taking of property by requiring the owners of a mobile home underneath an airport flight path to provide an overflight easement in exchange for a permit to build a carport and porch that had been illegally built by the previous owners of the property.

bottom of page