Their project was denied even though they asserted the builder's remedy. The lawsuit sets up a legal battle over whether cities can get out from under the builder's remedy by self-certifying their housing element.
In a case that could have significant implications for the application of the builder's remedy, an L.A. County judge said that La Canada-Flintridge's self-certification of its 2022 housing element may not be enough to get out from under the builder's remedy requirement. He implied that HCD approval is also required.
In a case from South Lake Tahoe, an appellate court ruled that the city has the right to eliminate all short-term rental permits in residential zones -- but not to give favorable treatment to local residents.
An appellate court concluded that San Diego staff emails constituted a "smoking gun" that the city had not considered a proposed increase in the height limit in the Midway area's programmatic EIR.
In a new case from Oakland, an appellate court ruled that the city can impose new fees on an old project despite signing an agreement that seemed to lock the fees in.
At least that's what an appellate court ruled in a case from Pomona that was brought, ironically, by a prospective cannabis merchant who argued otherwise.
Dueling environmental groups disagreed over how much the university should thin non-native trees to reduce fire hazard. They both sued -- and they both lost.
One-for-one mitigation may work for agricultural land or biological resources. But a court has found that it won't work for "The Sphinx" -- a unique and now-demolished brutalist building in downtown San Jose designed by the famous architect Cesar Pelli.
But Berkeley neighbors lose two other cases in the appellate court -- one dealing with student enrollment levels and the other dealing with a different aspect of the People's Park development.
The city claimed that because the entire 8,800-square-foot property had been conveyed as one more than 75 years ago, the original 25-foot-wide parcels from 1851 were not legal. An appellate court disagreed.
Appellate court says overlay zone doesn't meet state's minimum density requirements because underlying zoning allows less -- and as a result discrimination laws were violated as well.
City makes novel arguments like violation of First Amendment and Commerce Clause, but also argues that its charter city rights are violated and the relationship between the RHNA and CEQA puts it in an untenable position.
