The Court of Appeal upheld the approval of an eldercare facility, rejecting claims that the project was inconsistent with the zoning code based on architectural incompatibility and interference with views and ineligible for the Class 32 categorical exemption. Pacific Palisades Residents Association, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 88 Cal. App. 5th 1338 (2023).
Court Upholds San Diego Convention Center Expansion
A court of appeal has rejected Coastal Act and CEQA challenges to the Coastal Commission’s approval of expansions at the San Diego Convention Center. San Diego Navy Broadway Complex Coalition v. California Coastal Commission, 40 Cal. App. 5th 563 (2019). The court held both that the plaintiff Coalition failed to timely sue all indispensable
Conditions for Coastal Development Approvals Must Be Reasonably Tailored to Accomplish Their Intended Purpose
The Fourth District Court of Appeal held that that while most of the California Coastal Commission’s conditions for construction of a home on an oceanfront lot were reasonable, a requirement that the home be removed from the parcel “if any government agency orders it not to be occupied due to a natural hazard” was “overbroad,
Coastal Development Permit Cannot Be Challenged in Court Until After Coastal Commission Decides an Appeal
A court challenge to a local agency’s decision to grant a coastal development permit becomes moot when the Coastal Commission accepts an appeal of the decision, the California court of appeal ruled in Fudge v. City of Laguna Beach, No. G05571 (4th Dist., Feb. 13, 2019).
In 2017, the Laguna Beach City Council approved
Court Upholds Los Angeles’s Venice Sign-Off Procedure Against Due Process and Coastal Act Challenges
An appellate court held that the City of Los Angeles’s procedure for approval or denial of development projects in Venice did not violate residents’ due process rights because the procedure was ministerial. Venice Coalition to Preserve Unique Community Character v. City of Los Angeles, No. B285295 (2nd Dist., Jan. 9, 2019).
The City uses two different but parallel processes to approve development projects in Venice. The first is pursuant to the Venice specific plan, which was adopted to implement the polices of the City’s general plan. To comply with the specific plan, projects must either undergo a project permit compliance review or obtain a determination that the project is exempt from such review. The specific plan gives the Director of Planning the ability to issue a “Venice Sign-Off” or “VSO” for certain small development projects, such as construction and demolition of four or fewer residential units not located on certain pedestrian-friendly streets. A VSO exempts the project from a project permit compliance review. The Director first determines if a project is in a category eligible for a VSO. If the project is eligible, then the Director determines whether it meets specific, fixed development requirements based on the project’s location. A project that meets those requirements is exempt from permit compliance review.
The second process involves the Coastal Act, which applies to all development in Venice. To comply with the Coastal Act, the project must either receive a Coastal Development Permit or qualify for an exemption from the CDP requirement.
Continue Reading Court Upholds Los Angeles’s Venice Sign-Off Procedure Against Due Process and Coastal Act Challenges
Ban on Short-Term Home Rentals Is a “Development” Subject to the Coastal Act
Underlining the broad and expansive definition of “development” under the California Coastal Act, the Second Appellate District ruled that a coastal homeowners’ association’s ban on short-term rentals is considered “development” subject to the requirements of the Coastal Act. Greenfield v. Mandalay Shores Community Association, 21 Cal. App. 5th (2018)
The Mandalay Shores Community Association
California Supreme Court Holds City EIR Must Identify and Analyze Potential Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas Under the Coastal Act
A local agency’s environmental impact report must identify any areas on a project site that might qualify as “Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas” under the California Coastal Act, and must account for those areas in the EIR’s analysis of project alternatives and mitigation measures. Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach, California Supreme Court
California Coastal Act Trumps Statutes Awarding Density and Height Increase Bonuses
Statutes awarding housing density and height increase bonuses do not take precedence over the California Coastal Act, according to a decision of the Second Circuit Court of Appeal. Kalnel Gardens, LLC v. City of Los Angeles, No. B264434 (2nd Dist. Sept. 29, 2016).
Kalnel Gardens, LLC, proposed to build a 15-unit housing complex in
Coastal Commission May Not Review City Nuisance Abatement Ordinance Passed In Good Faith
The California Coastal Commission lacks jurisdiction to review a city’s adoption of a nuisance ordinance because a municipality’s enactment of an ordinance is not an appealable action. However, the city must demonstrate that it exercised its nuisance abatement power, pursuant to Coastal Act section 30005(b), in good faith, and not as a pretext for avoiding