News & Analysis as of

California › Urban Planning & Development › Appeals

Nossaman LLP

California Court of Appeal Confirms Legislatively Enacted Development Impact Fee

Nossaman LLP on

In 2024, in what was heralded as a big win for developers in California, the U.S. Supreme Court upended decades of California precedent and held that legislatively enacted development impact fees must satisfy the “essential...more

Nossaman LLP

Legislatively Enacted Fees Have Another Day in Court

Nossaman LLP on

On Tuesday, June 24, 2025, the California Court of Appeal heard argument in Sheetz v. County of El Dorado. You may recall that the California Court of Appeal previously held that legislatively enacted development impact fees...more

Perkins Coie

VMT Thresholds Must Be Based on Substantial Evidence Specific to Local Conditions

Perkins Coie on

The County of San Diego’s thresholds for exempting certain projects from vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis were not supported by substantial evidence showing they were appropriate specifically for the County. Cleveland...more

Alston & Bird

Land Use Matters | May 2025 | CEQA Appellate Decisions & Other Legal Developments

Alston & Bird on

City of Los Angeles - Expedited and Streamlined Review Process for Community Rebuilding - On March 18, 2025, Mayor Karen Bass issued Revised Emergency Executive Order No. 1 (EO 1) directing the Department of City Planning,...more

Downey Brand LLP

Are Your CEQA Thresholds Supported by Substantial Evidence? Fourth District Rules San Diego County’s Thresholds of Significance...

Downey Brand LLP on

In Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. County of San Diego (2025) 109 Cal. App.5th 1257, the Fourth District Court of Appeal invalidated two thresholds of significance adopted by the County of San Diego (“County”) that in...more

Meyers Nave

Court of Appeal Invalidates County's Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Thresholds for CEQA Review

Meyers Nave on

A California court of appeal has held that a lead agency conducting environmental review, under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), of “vehicle miles traveled” (VMT) impacts may not unquestioningly use thresholds...more

Miller Starr Regalia

Fourth District Invalidates San Diego County’s “Infill” And “Small Project” VMT Screening Thresholds As Lacking Substantial...

Miller Starr Regalia on

In a published opinion filed March 27, 2025, the Fourth District Court of Appeal (Div. 1) reversed the trial court’s judgment denying a writ petition, and held that two screening thresholds of significance for vehicle miles...more

Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass

Summary of Select 2024 California Real Estate and Land Use Cases Impacting Real Estate Developers

Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass on

On January 21, 2025, Coblentz litigation partner Skye Langs presented for the Bar Association of San Francisco’s Real Property section on the following real estate and land use cases from 2024...more

Alston & Bird

Land Use Matters February 2025 | CEQA Appellate Decisions & Other Legal Developments

Alston & Bird on

Los Angeles County - Executive Order Streamlines Path to Rebuild Homes, Businesses, and Communities Destroyed by Los Angeles Firestorms - In response to the multiple firestorms in Los Angeles County that started on January 7,...more

Perkins Coie

Grocery Outlet Qualified For CEQA Class 32 Exemption as Infill Development

Perkins Coie on

The Sixth District Court of Appeal held that the undefined terms “in-fill development” and “substantially surrounded by urban uses” in the CEQA exemption for in-fill development were not limited by the definitions of similar...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Court Holds Proposed Ballot Measure Excluding Community Plan Area from Height Limit Is Not a “Later Activity” For...

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

In late June, California’s Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld a Superior Court decision in Save Our Access v. City of San Diego, providing clarity for determining when a “later activity” is beyond the scope of an existing...more

Perkins Coie

EIR Recirculation Not Required Where Final Version of Approved Project Was Not Specifically Evaluated in EIR

Perkins Coie on

The Second District Court of Appeal held that: (1) despite revisions to a mixed-use development project, the project description in the EIR was “accurate, stable, and finite;” (2) an opportunity for public comment on the...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Court of Appeal Holds No-Project Alternative Analysis May Mean More When Conversation is an Option and Reinforces Low Barrier to...

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

In Save the Hill Group v. City of Livermore et al., the First District Court of Appeal (Div. 5) reversed and remanded the superior court’s decision to uphold the reissued final environmental impact report (RFEIR) for a...more

Perkins Coie

State Density Bonus Law Does Not Require Applicants to Demonstrate Economic Feasibility of Project When Requesting Incentives

Perkins Coie on

A Court of Appeal held that the state’s density bonus law (Gov’t Code § 65915) does not require applicants to submit financial information to support requests for incentives or waivers and preempted a city ordinance that...more

14 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide