Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation v. City of Sacramento (2019) ___ Cal.App.5th ___.

In 2015, the City of Sacramento adopted an update to its general plan. The 2015 general plan amendment (“2015 Update”) was an update to a comprehensive 2030 plan adopted in 2009. The 2015 Update included an extension of the general plan

By William W. Abbott & Kristen Kortick

City of Hesperia v. Lake Arrowhead Community Services District (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 734.

In City of Hesperia v. Lake Arrowhead Community Services District (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 734, the 4th  Appellate District affirmed a writ of mandate issued to Lake Arrowhead Community Services District (“District”) directing

Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania, ___ U.S. ___, 139 S.Ct. 2162, 204 L.Ed.2d 558 (2019)

On June 21, 2019, by a 5-4 vote, the United States Supreme Court in Knick v. Township of Scott, Pennsylvania overruled the 34-year-old ripeness rule articulated in Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City,

Hollywoodians Encouraging Rental Opportunities v. City of Los Angeles (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 768

The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of a writ of mandate demanding the City of Los Angeles (“City”) prepare an EIR for the conversion of a former rental apartment building into a hotel. The Court held that as

Shirli Fabbri Weiss v. City of Del Mar (2019) Cal.App. LEXIS 834

Litigation challenging a land use decision is subject to short statute of limitations. While Government Code section 65009 sets forth several different time frames depending upon the legal theory, subdivision (c) requires a plaintiff to file and serve the complaint and summons within

Sacramentans for Fair Planning v. City of Sacramento (2019) 2019 Cal.App. LEXIS  646

The City of Sacramento, a charter city, approved a fifteen-story mixed use project in its Midtown area, significantly in excess of its adopted height and FAR standards. This approval was based upon a general plan policy which stated, “The City may allow

Boatworks, LLC v. City of Alameda (2019) 35 Cal. App. 5th 290.

In 2014, the City of Alameda adopted updated Development Impact Fees pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (“MFA”), including fees for park acquisition and improvement.  A property owner/developer (“Boatworks”) timely filed a facial challenge to the park fee and the trial court

California Charter Schools Association v. City of Huntington Park 2019 Cal.App. LEXIS 444.

Cities and counties frequently rely upon Government Code section 65858 to control land uses in the face of a regulatory or policy update.  An interim ordinance can be adopted following minimum notice and hearing procedures.  The initial ordinance is effective for

1305 Ingraham, LLC v. City of Los Angeles, (2019) 32 Cal.App. 5th 1253

On June 15, 2016, the City of Los Angeles (“the City”) issued a “Specific Plan Compliance Review Density Bonus & Affordable Housing Incentives” (the “Determination”) for a mixed-use affordable housing project. The Determination provided that it would become final unless an appeal

Reserve your seat for one of four seminars taking place in early 2019.

In January and February 2019 Abbott & Kindermann, Inc. will present its 18th annual educational program for clients and colleagues interested in current land use, environmental, and real estate issues affecting commercial and residential development, agriculture, real estate transactions, easements, mining