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. View posts by topic. Subscribe 🡢
Agencies Must Preserve Emails For CEQA Record of Proceedings
EPA Failed to Evaluate Potential Adverse Impact of Pesticide on Monarch Butterfly
Development Agreement, Not Vesting Tentative Map, Governed Whether New Fees Applied to Project
State Water Board Has Authority to Implement Temporary Emergency Regulations Curtailing Water Diversions Without Prior Evidentiary Hearing
Disparate-Impact Claims Under FHA and FEHA Must Demonstrate Causal Connection Between a City’s Approval of Development Projects and Racial Disparity in Housing
Public Universities Must Comply With CEQA When Deciding to Increase Enrollment Beyond Levels Specified in Development Plan EIR
Agency Notice of Deadline for Filing Suit Was Defective
Suit Challenging Interpretation of Tentative Map Conditions Was Not Time-Barred
University Campus Was Not an Illusory Element of Project Under CEQA
Judgment Against Prior Owners Fixed Tidelands Boundaries, Barring Plaintiffs’ Quiet Title and Inverse Condemnation Claims.
The court of appeal held that plaintiffs' inverse condemnation and damages claims based on dredging in the bay adjacent to their properties was barred under the doctrine of res judicata based on a 1931 judgment conclusively establishing that the property alleged to have been taken or damaged was not owned by plaintiffs.
Brown Act Violation Did Not Require Nullification of Project Approval Where No Prejudice Was Shown
EIR Improperly Deferred Formulation and Implementation of Mitigation Measures for New Oil and Gas Drilling
Suit for Breach of Development Agreement Should Be Treated as a Breach-of-Contract Action, Not an Administrative Law Proceeding
Judicial Council Shortens Tolling Period for Statutes of Limitations
Reclassification of Land From Urban to Agricultural Did Not Result in Unconstitutional Regulatory Taking
The State of Hawaii Land Use Commission's reversion of 1,060 acres from a conditional urban land use classification to the prior agricultural use classification was not an unconstitutional taking because the landowner could still reap economic benefits from the property, the reclassification did not substantially affect the overall valuation or any potential sales, and the landowner should have