In a dispute over a traffic impact fee imposed on a residential building permit by El Dorado County, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the long-standing position of California and other state courts that the Takings...more
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...more
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...more
The Ninth Circuit upheld dismissal of a takings claim as unripe because plaintiffs did not seek a timely exemption from the City’s requirements for conversion of property into condominium ownership. Pakdel v. City and County...more
This Supplement is intended for use in conjunction with Curtin’s California Land Use & Planning Law, Thirty-Fourth Edition (2014), authored by Perkins Coie attorneys Cecily Talbert Barclay and Matthew S. Gray. In lieu of...more
8/13/2015
/ Agricultural Land ,
Airports ,
AT&T ,
Berkeley Hillside v City of Berkeley ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Caltrans ,
Cell Phones ,
Cell Towers ,
Central Valley ,
CEQA ,
Clean Water Act ,
Delta Smelt ,
Elder Care ,
Endangered Species ,
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) ,
Establishment Clause ,
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ,
Fiber Optic Cables ,
First Amendment ,
Fishing Industry ,
General Plan ,
Greenhouse Gas Emissions ,
High-Speed Rail ,
Historic Preservation ,
Indian Gaming Regulation Act ,
Municipalities ,
Nonconforming Use ,
Plastic Bag Bans ,
Sacramento Kings ,
San Francisco ,
SCOTUS ,
Smartphones ,
Subdivision Map Act ,
T-Mobile ,
T-Mobile South v City of Roswell ,
Takings Clause ,
Tribal Lands ,
Vesting ,
Wal-Mart ,
Water
The Fifth District Court of Appeal has confirmed that the 90-day statute of limitations under the Subdivision Map Act includes takings claims arising out of Map Act decisions. Honchariw_v._County_of_Stanislaus, No. F069145...more
7/29/2015
/ Affordable Housing ,
Attorney's Fees ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Inverse Condemnation ,
Land Developers ,
Real Estate Development ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Subdivision ,
Subdivision Map Act ,
Takings Clause ,
Writ of Mandamus