August 2004

by William W. Abbott

Despite what project critics may say, lead agencies do get it right every now and then. The recent decision of Mira Mar Mobile Community v. City of Oceanside (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 477 is such an illustration. As one would suspect, existing residents in coastal communities prize their views of the ocean, and can be counted on to be large in their criticism of any project which potentially interferes with what they rightfully see as their right to a view of the ocean. Continue Reading Court of Appeal Affirms Dismissal of CEQA Challenge Alleging Inadequate Alternatives, Inadequate Consideration of View Impacts to Neighbors and Insufficient Evaluation of Mitigation to Coastal Sage Scrub

by William W. Abbott and Heather Gerken

Land use applicants frequently fail to appreciate the deference that a reviewing court must give a city council or board of supervisors. Disgruntled with an adverse decision, an adversely affected applicant often believes that they are entitled to re-argue the merits of their position. As the following cases illustrate, judicial review of controversial land use regulations does not start with a blank canvas. Continue Reading California Courts Reaffirm the Broad Discretion Held by Cities and Counties in Enacting Land Use Regulations and Setting Policy