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
July 25, 2013

Pre-Approval Disclosures Between Agency and Applicant Waive Privileges In CEQA Cases.

The Fifth Appellate District has issued another in a series of decisions regarding administrative records in CEQA cases.  The court held that the "common interest doctrine" does not protect otherwise privileged communications shared by a developer and an agency prior to approval of a project because the two cannot be considered to be advancing any shared interest at the preapproval stage.&

View blog post
Placeholder image
July 22, 2013

County Can’t Use Growth Control Initiative to Bar Previously-Approved Project

It takes an unusual set of circumstances for a California appellate court to find a regulatory taking based on denial of a discretionary land use entitlement.  But those circumstances existed in a recent case in which the court not only found a taking, but upheld an award of attorney's fees to the developer for both the inverse condemnation and related civil rights claims.  View blog post
Placeholder image
July 19, 2013

Coastal Commission May Not Review City Nuisance Abatement Ordinance Passed In Good Faith

The California Coastal Commission lacks jurisdiction to review a city's adoption of a nuisance ordinance because a municipality's enactment of an ordinance is not an appealable action.  However, the city must demonstrate that it exercised its nuisance abatement power, pursuant to Coastal Act section 30005(b), in good faith, and not as a pretext for avoiding its obligations under the Coas View blog post
Placeholder image
July 19, 2013

Ninth Circuit Clarifies ESA’s “Cumulative Effects” Requirement

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has confirmed two important points under the federal Endangered Species Act: 
  • A "cumulative effect" under the ESA is different from a "cumulative impact" under NEPA
  • No "cumulative effects" analysis is required in informal ESA section 7 consultations.
View blog post
Placeholder image
July 14, 2013

County Could Not Make Density Bonus Conditional Upon Compliance With Local Affordable Housing Requirements

A local agency may not condition the availability of a density bonus upon provision of more affordable housing than the minimum required under the State Density Bonus Law.  Latinos Unidos Del Valle De Napa Y Solano v.

View blog post
Placeholder image
July 12, 2013

Tentative Map Life Extended Again for Two Years

Governor Jerry Brown has signed into law AB 116, which again extends the life of tentative maps by two years.  The move recognizes that, despite the rebounding housing market in many cities, many approved maps in California that are set to expire still cannot be processed because of persistent adverse economic conditions.  Unlike the three other statutory extensions enacted since 2008, View blog post
Placeholder image
July 8, 2013

Large Solar Energy Project Survives Williamson Act And CEQA Challenge

The Sixth District Court of Appeal has given a boost to utility-scale solar projects by rejecting the types of Williamson Act and CEQA challenges that are often brought against those projects.  Save Panoche Valley v.

View blog post
Placeholder image
July 2, 2013

Judicial Review of Environmental Impact Reports: Is There Really A Need for CEQA Reform?

Every few years, with El Nino-like regularity, a wave of interest in CEQA reform sweeps through the business community, accompanied by pleas to the legislature to overhaul the statute.  In the end, few substantive changes are made.  This year is no exception. (See June 14th post).

View blog post
Placeholder image
June 26, 2013

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That Monetary Exactions are Subject to Nexus and Rough Proportionality Requirements

In a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court expanded the reach of the requirement that there be a "nexus" and "rough proportionality" between the impacts of a proposed development and governmental conditions imposed on the development.  Koontz v. St. View blog post
Placeholder image
June 14, 2013

CEQA and Land Use Bills -- An Update

SB 731 (Steinberg)  CEQA Modernization Act of 2013.  (Last amended May 24, 2013.  Passed to Assembly May 30, 2013
  • Aesthetic Impacts in Transit Priority Areas Not Significant.
View blog post
Placeholder image
June 12, 2013

Under the Brown Act, a Planning Commission’s Adoption of a CEQA Document is a Distinct Item of Business that Must be Expressly Disclosed on the Agenda

The Ralph M.

View blog post
Placeholder image
June 2, 2013

Legislature Winnows CEQA Bills

Out of 26 CEQA bills introduced early this year, eight have met the Legislature's May 31 deadline to move from the state Senate to the Assembly or vice versa, and therefore are still considered viable.  (For more details, and an update on these bills, see our June 14 post).  For the most part, these bills w

View blog post
Placeholder image
May 6, 2013

California Cities and Counties Can “Just Say No” to Medical Marijuana Dispensaries

The California Supreme Court has unanimously upheld a local ban on medical marijuana dispensaries, holding the ban was not preempted by state statutes governing medical marijuana. The decision does not come as a surprise, given that state court of appeal decisions consistently have upheld local land use regulation of dispensaries. In City of Riverside v. View blog post
Placeholder image
April 30, 2013

D.C. Circuit Upholds Broad EPA Veto Power Over Wetlands Permits

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act grants the EPA "veto" power over fill permits issued by the Army Corps of Engineers.  On April 23, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. View blog post
Placeholder image
April 29, 2013

Federal Agencies Cannot Use Consent Decrees To Adopt Stricter Regulatory Requirements, According to Ninth Circuit

Can a district court "approve resolution of litigation involving a federal agency though a consent decree, which substantially and permanently amends regulations that the agency could only otherwise amend by complying with statutory required rulemaking procedures"? View blog post
Home
Jump back to top