A recent decision highlights the importance of strict compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act’s requirement that findings be made every five years concerning unexpended fees. The Sixth District Court of Appeal held that the...more
A traffic mitigation fee required for construction of a single-family home did not amount to an “unconstitutional condition” in violation of the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment, and the County complied with the...more
The California State University system may not condition its funding of mitigation for off-site impacts of a campus expansion project on receipt of a legislative appropriation earmarked for that purpose, according to a...more
The California Supreme Court’s involvement in CEQA cases has been relatively limited since he statute’s enactment in 1970, with the court taking review of at most one or two appellate court decisions a year. The last two...more
1/6/2015
/ Bay Area Air Quality Management District ,
Building Permits ,
CEQA ,
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) ,
Exemptions ,
High-Speed Rail ,
Interstate Commerce ,
Judicial Review ,
Mitigation ,
Preemption ,
Public Projects ,
Railroads ,
Real Estate Development ,
Sierra Club