Cities are moving aggressively to adopt objective design standards, now required in reviewing housing projects. But developers can use the Density Bonus Law to end-run some of the standards. 

San Diego judge rules that Santee couldn't end-run a voter referendum by repealing approval and then passing an emergency ordinance moving the project forward. SB 330 was no help.

The City of Berkeley got hammered in court for violating SB 35 and the HAA by denying a project to be built on a parking lot on Native American shellmound property. Now the city has to pay the developer $2.6 million -- plus attorneys fees.

In ruling from Los Angeles, appellate court says that "local control has not been abrogated by the HAA.”

Governor agrees to SB 4, SB 423, and various CEQA and density bonus reforms without vetoing any bills. He also signed the "CEQA stall" bill.

In a new lawsuit, the developer claims the city stalled the application so long it amounted to a denial. The city claims it is processing the developer's builder's remedy application. 

Davis situation highlights the growing tension between local ballot measures requiring voter approval and the Housing Accountability Act's restrictions on project denial.

Two years ago, an appellate panel ruled that the controversial housing proposal should have been processed under SB 35 -- the first major ruling. Now the court has ruled that a local judge had the authority to rule on Housing Accountability Act violations as well.

Among other things, the appellate ruling found that Livermore's design standards are not objective and therefore cannot be used to deny an affordable housing project.

100% affordable project can't be struck down based on subjective standards or lack of strict adherence to specific plan policies. CEQA exemption based on Downtown Specific Plan was also upheld.