California Land Use & Development Law Report
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.
Court of Appeal Clarifies When Development Agreements Are Subject to Referendum in California
The First District Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Move Eden Housing v. City of Livermore, ___ Cal. App. 5th ___, 2025 WL 2837353 (Oct.
Pre-1972 Conveyance of Multiple Lots Did Not Create Separate Legal Parcels Under Map Act
Under the Subdivision Map Act, the creation of legal parcels prior to 1972 requires more than a deed referencing multiple lots—only a conveyance that separates a portion of land from contiguous property creates a new legal parcel. Cox v. City of Oakland, 17 Cal.5th 362 (2025).
Supreme Court Rules Legislatively Adopted Exactions Not Exempt From Nollan/Dolan Scrutiny
Council Resolution Approving an Amendment to a Disposition and Development Agreement Was Subject to Referendum
Lot Created on 1869 Map and Conveyed With Fewer Than Four Other Lots Was Lawfully Subdivided
The First District Court of Appeal held that a single deed conveying four or fewer contiguous lots can qualify for a presumption of legality under section 66412.6(a) of the Subdivision Map Act so long as the lots are separately described (including by reference to an antiquated subdivision map) and all other requirements of section 66412.6(a) are satisfied.
Agreement Purporting to Prevent City from Imposing New Impact Fees on Project Infringed Police Powers
The Court of Appeal held that a city-developer agreement that ostensibly precluded the City of Oakland from imposing any new impact fees on the project constituted an impermissible infringement of the City's police power. Discovery Builders Inc v City of Oakland, 92 Cal. App. 5th 799 (2023).
Court Orders Refund of All Unexpended Fees in Landmark Mitigation Fee Act Case
A recent case involving developer Charles Keenan and the City of Palo Alto highlights the importance of strict compliance with Mitigation Fee Act's requirement that findings be made every five years concerning unexpended fees.
Suit Challenging City’s Interpretation of 20-Year-Old Affordable Housing Agreement Was Timely
The Court of Appeal ruled that a suit concerning an affordable housing fee that plaintiff had agreed to pay two decades earlier was still timely because the 90-day limitations period under the Subdivision Map Act did not begin to run until a dispute arose over the interpretation of provisions in the affordable housing agreement. Schmeir v. City of Berkeley, 76 Cal. App.
Another Court Rules That Special Taxes Proposed By A Citizen-Sponsored Initiative May Be Enacted With A Simple Majority Vote
Another court of appeal has held that local special taxes adopted by a citizen-sponsored initiative do not require two-thirds voter approval. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v.
Fifth Appellate District Agrees that Special Taxes Enacted by Initiative Do Not Require Two-Thirds Supermajority Vote.
Another court of appeal has held that local special taxes adopted by a citizen-sponsored initiative do not require two-thirds voter approval. City of Fresno v. Fresno Building Healthy Communities, No. F080264. (5th Dist., Dec. 17, 2020).
Special Taxes Enacted by Initiative Do Not Require Two-Thirds Supermajority Vote
A court of appeal ruled that provisions of the California Constitution requiring a supermajority vote for special taxes imposed by local government do not apply to a special tax enacted by local initiative. City and County of San Francisco v. All Persons Interested in the Matter of Proposition C, 51 Cal. App.