By Matthew Hinks A trial court’s order granting the motion of the City of Lake Forest for a preliminary injunction against the operations of a medical marijuana dispensary has gone — well — “up in smoke”. Orange County Superior Court Judge Chafee had ruled that the city’s zoning ordinances, which…
California Land Use Blog
Following up on Avenida San Juan Partnership v. City of San Clemente: Judges’ reluctance to issue a writ prior to final judgment demonstrates need for clarification of Palma footnote
By Matthew Hinks In an earlier article on the California Land Use Blog, I wrote about the recent decision in Avenida San Juan Partnership v. City of San Clemente, 201 Cal.App.4th 1256 (2011), in which the court of appeal affirmed in large part a verdict in favor of a developer…
Heads Up Property Owners and Developers! Local challenges implicating Subdivision Map Act may impose 90-day statute of limitations – Aiuto v. City and County of San Francisco
By Matthew Hinks In most instances, causes of action for inverse condemnation and regulatory takings in California are governed by the 5-year statute of limitations of Civil Procedure Code §§ 318 and 319. Preemption claims are governed by the 3-year statute of limitations of Civil Procedure Code § 338(a). Section…
Spot-Zoning and Regulatory Takings: Developer Succeeds in California Court of Appeal – Avenida San Juan Partnership v. City of San Clemente
by Matthew Hinks Court judgments finding a regulatory taking are relatively rare. So too are decisions upholding the oft-heard complaint of “spot zoning”. In the recent case of Avenida San Juan Partnership v. City of San Clemente, 201 Cal.App.4th 1256 (2011), the court (and the plaintiff) hit the daily double.…
City of LA Adopts Job Killer Policy
Ben Reznik In an attempt to appease a well-heeled group of neighbors in Benedict Canyon who want to stop one particular project, the City of Los Angeles has adopted a new interpretation of its municipal code which will result in more than $1 billion worth of construction being delayed into…
California Supreme Court Decision Eradicates Redevelopment Agencies
Ben Reznik and Sheri Bonstelle In a blow to the more than 400 redevelopment agencies in California, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion today upholding the constitutionality of AB1X26, the Dissolution Bill and finding AB1X27, the Pay for Continuation Bill, unconstitutional in the California Redevelopment Agencies v. Matosantos case.…
CEQA: State Agencies and Extra-Jurisdictional Impacts
Neill Brower The Fourth District of the California Court of Appeal recently ruled that the California State University system could not use budgetary uncertainty as a basis for determining the feasibility of mitigation for off-campus impacts. In City of San Diego v. Board of Trustees of the California State University,…
Current Flux of California Redevelopment Law
Legislative Elimination of Redevelopment Agencies As part of its 2011 – 2012 budget proposal, the California Governor’s Office proposed permanently shutting down local redevelopment agencies to free up $1.7 billion of tax increments to apply to the State’s budget deficit. The monies were slated to help fund schools, public safety…
CEQA: Sunnyvale Court Affirms Use of Multiple Baseline Scenarios in EIRs
Neill Brower A recent court decision upheld the use of multiple scenarios in a traffic analysis in an environmental impact report (“EIR”) for a redevelopment project. On November 22, 2011, the Sixth District of the California Court of Appeal certified for publication its decision in Pfeiffer v. City of Sunnyvale…
Why is L.A. determined to treat the Deputy Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia unfairly?
Ben Reznik Why is the City of Los Angeles singling out the Deputy Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia and forcing him to follow procedures never before imposed on others in order to allow him to build his home in the Benedict Canyon neighborhood of Los Angeles? That’s a question being…