CP&DR

Setback For North San Diego County Housing Project

Dec 29, 2009

CP&DR Staff, Housing, In Brief, San Diego County, Vol. 24 No. 18 Dec 2009 - 2

The proposed Merriam Mountains housing development in North San Diego County suffered a setback in December when the Board of Supervisors split 2-2 on the project. The tie vote equates to rejection of the project; however, supervisors within 30 days may call for a new hearing, and reconsideration appears likely.

West Hollywood Multi-Family Moratorium Invalidated

Dec 28, 2009

CP&DR Staff, Housing, Legal Digest, Los Angeles County, Vol. 24 No. 17 Dec 2009 - 1

A City of West Hollywood moratorium on new multi-family housing development has been declared invalid by the Second District Court of Appeal. The court ruled that the city had not made required findings for the moratorium.

City Given Discretion To Grant Density Bonuses

by Paul Shigley on Dec 15, 2009

Housing, Los Angeles County, Vol. 24 No. 17 Dec 2009 - 1

The City of Berkeley’s approval of density bonuses for a mixed-use project has been upheld by the First District Court of Appeal, which rejected a project opponent’s contention that the city had wrongly applied the state density bonus law. >>read more

Auditor Approves Of HCD Housing Grants

Nov 23, 2009

California, CP&DR Staff, Housing, In Brief, Vol. 24 No. 16 Nov 2009 - 2

A report by the California state auditor gives the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) generally good marks for overseeing nearly $5 billion in bond funds approved by voters.

Local Control Over Mobile Home Park Conversions Limited

Aug 28, 2009

CP&DR Staff, Housing, Legal Digest, Sonoma County, Vol. 24 No. 11 Sep 2009 - 1

Cities and counties have little authority over the conversion of mobile home parks to resident-owned subdivisions, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled.

Court Rules L.A. Inclusionary Housing Mandate Violates State Law

Aug 20, 2009

Housing, Legal Digest, Los Angeles County, Paul Shigley, Vol. 24 No. 10 Aug 2009 - 2

A state appellate court ruling striking down an affordable housing mandate in the City of Los Angeles could have statewide implications. Affordable-housing advocates and municipal attorneys say the decision, if it stands, calls into question inclusionary housing ordinances that require developers to set aside and price a certain percentage of new rental units at below-market rates.

Court Refuses To Consider RHNA Lawsuit

by Paul Shigley on Jul 15, 2009

Housing, Orange County, Paul Shigley, SCAG, Vol. 24 No. 08 Jul 2009 - 2

A courtroom is not the location to settle disputes over regional fair-share housing allocations. So ruled the Fourth District Court of Appeal on June 30 in a closely watched case involving the City of Irvine. As a result of the ruling, the city apparently is stuck with having to plan for development of 35,000 additional housing units ï¿½ equal to about half of its existing inventory ï¿½ over the next five years.

SF Draws Line On Industrial Area Gentrification

May 1, 2009

Housing, Morris Newman, Places, San Francisco, Vol. 24 No. 05 May 2009

The Eastern Neighborhoods Community Plans are complex, comprehensive documents that attempt to safeguard surviving industrial sites for business, while providing both incentives and requirements for new housing. The long-awaited planning documents essentially are declaring, "Gentrification stops here."

L.A. Density Bonus Law Struck Down

Apr 29, 2009

CP&DR Staff, Housing, In Brief, Los Angeles County, Vol. 24 No. 05 May 2009

The City of Los Angeles's closely watched density bonus ordinance has been struck down because the city did not subject the ordinance to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review.

Court Rejects In-Lieu Housing Fee Methodology

Mar 30, 2009

Housing, Legal Digest, Paul Shigley, San Joaquin County, Vol. 24 No. 04 Apr 2009

The City of Patterson's in-lieu affordable housing fee has been invalidated by the Fifth District Court of Appeal, which rejected the city's methodology for setting the fee. Homebuilders celebrated the decision as a victory in their long fight to constrain development fees, while affordable housing advocates and municipal attorneys described the ruling as limited.

Articles