Skip to main content
Home
Home

California Land Use & Development Law Report

tree in grassy meadow

California Land Use & Development Law Report

California Land Use & Development Law Report offers insights into legal issues relating to development and use of land and federal, state and local permitting and approval processes.

Placeholder image
January 25, 2023 CEQA

CEQA Challenges to EIR’s Biological and Emergency Evacuation Analyses Rejected

A court of appeal has denied CEQA challenges to the EIR for an apartment project, holding that analysis of biological impacts need not be based on surveys conducted in the same year the city issued its notice of preparation of the EIR. Save North Petaluma River and Wetlands v. City of Petaluma, 86 Cal.App.5th 207 (2022).

View blog post
Placeholder image
January 18, 2023 CEQA

CEQA YEAR IN REVIEW -- 2022

A SUMMARY OF PUBLISHED APPELLATE OPINIONS UNDER THE 

View blog post
Placeholder image
January 5, 2023 CEQA

Athletic Field Lighting Project Not Categorically Exempt from CEQA

The First District Court of Appeal overturned the City of San Francisco's decision that Saint Ignatius High School's project to install four permanent 90-foot-tall athletic field lights was exempt from CEQA. Saint Ignatius Neighborhood Association v. City and County of San Francisco, 85 Cal.App 5th (2022).

View blog post
Court Gavel
December 29, 2022 CEQA Environmental and Land Use Litigation

Meritless CEQA Suit Warranted Malicious Prosecution Claim Against Attorney

 

The court of appeal held that an attorney's actions in filing and prosecuting a meritless challenge to construction of a single-family home supported a claim for malicious prosecution. Jenkins v. Brandt-Hawley, No A162852 (1st Dist., Dec 28, 2022).

View blog post
Land Construction
October 24, 2022 Takings

Traffic Mitigation Fee Did Not Violate the Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine Under Nolan and Dolan

A traffic mitigation fee required for construction of a single-family home did not amount to an "unconstitutional condition" in violation of the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment, and the County complied with the Mitigation Fee Act in assessing the fee. Sheetz v. County of El Dorado, No. C093682 (4th Dist., Oct 19, 2022).

View blog post
Real Estate and Housing Construction
June 22, 2022 California Coastal Act CEQA

CEQA Challenge to Campus Town Project in Monterey County Was Untimely

 

View blog post
Placeholder image
January 18, 2022 CEQA

CEQA YEAR IN REVIEW 2021

A Summary of Published Appellate Opinions Under the California Environmental Quality Act

Introduction

The courts issued relatively few published CEQA decisions in 2021, with no California Supreme Court activity and no blockbuster court of appeal opinions. But two cases addressed topics of great current interest: wildfire and climate change impacts.

View blog post
bridge in coastal area with view of ocean
January 14, 2022 California Coastal Act CEQA

Coastal Commission Must Complete Environmental Review Under Its Certified Regulatory Program Before Approving Permit

The court of appeal found that the California Coastal Commission erred by approving a coastal development permit for a residential development before environmental review for the project had been completed. Friends, Artists and Neighbors of Elkhorn Slough v. California Coastal Commission, 2021 WL 5905714 (No. H048088, 6th Dist., December 14, 2021).

View blog post
Blue Hour, United States Supreme Court Building, Washington DC, America
July 23, 2021 Takings

Pursuit of State Administrative Remedies Not Necessary to Obtain Final Decision for Federal Takings Claim

The U.S. Supreme Court held that property owners do not have to comply with state administrative processes to obtain a final decision before bringing a takings claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 when the government's position is clear. Pakdel v.

View blog post
Placeholder image
May 14, 2021 Takings

Requirement That Proposed Development Mitigate Cumulative Traffic Impacts Violated Nollan/Dolan Standard

An initiative measure that required new development to mitigate not only its individual traffic impacts but also cumulative impacts of other projects on traffic levels of service violated the rough-proportionality standard of Nollan and Dolan and was therefore unconstitutional.

View blog post
documents with pen
May 3, 2021 Takings California Coastal Act Environmental and Land Use Litigation

Plaintiff Not Required to Submit Multiple Development Applications Before Bringing Takings Claim

Multiple applications for a development project are not required where the first permit denial makes clear that no development of the property would be allowed under any circumstance. Felkay v. City of Santa Barbara, No.

View blog post
Placeholder image
January 6, 2021 Takings

Condemnee Need Not Entirely Vacate Premises to Recover Damages After Condemnation is Abandoned

Complete physical dispossession of a property is not a prerequisite to an award of damages after a condemnation proceeding is abandoned—moving from the property in reliance on the order granting the agency possession is sufficient. San Joaquin Regional Transit District v. Superior Court, No. C084755 (3rd Dist., Dec.

View blog post
Placeholder image
January 4, 2021 CEQA

CEQA YEAR IN REVIEW 2020

A Summary of Published Appellate Opinions Involving the California Environmental Quality Act

Despite relatively few published opinions this year, there were significant appellate court rulings on a range of topics, including whether projects are properly classified as discretionary or ministerial, the adequacy of mitigation, agencies' document retention obligations, the remedy for an in

View blog post
Placeholder image
September 2, 2020 Takings

Condemned Property Not Used Within Ten Years Must Be Offered for Sale to Original Owner

The City of Los Angeles was required to offer to sell condemned property back to its original owner because the property had not been used and the City Council did not adopt a resolution reauthorizing the public use until 19 days past the 10-year statutory deadline. Rutgard v. City of Los Angeles, No. B297655 (2nd Dist., July 30, 2020).

View blog post
Placeholder image
June 29, 2020 Takings

Judgment Against Prior Owners Fixed Tidelands Boundaries, Barring Plaintiffs’ Quiet Title and Inverse Condemnation Claims.

The court of appeal held that plaintiffs' inverse condemnation and damages claims based on dredging in the bay adjacent to their properties was barred under the doctrine of res judicata based on a 1931 judgment conclusively establishing that the property alleged to have been taken or damaged was not owned by plaintiffs.

View blog post
Home
Jump back to top