One of the most notable laws in California's package of housing laws passed by the State Legislature and signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2017 is SB 35, which requires most local governments to issue housing developers streamlined approvals in 90-180 days for projects that comply with a number of qualifying criteria.

With the statewide housing crisis at the forefront of the California Legislature's 2017 agenda, legislators unleashed an avalanche of more than 130 bills this year.

California's Fourth District Court of Appeal has provided useful guidance on processing requirements for environmental review documents prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)...

This is the first edition in an ongoing series of "Corner Briefings" highlighting urban infill legal tools and opportunities.

San Jose's ordinance required developers of "for sale" residential units to set aside 15 percent of their project units as affordable units.

The Practical Result of the Court's Decision Is That Categorical Exemptions Remain a Viable Tool to Review Small Projects Across the State

Recent proposed revisions to CEQA guidelines implementing SB 743 do not address parts of SB 743 that are designed to streamline CEQA guidelines for some infill projects.

On September 11, 2013, the California Supreme Court granted the California Building Industry Association's (CBIA) petition for review challenging a San Jose ordinance that imposed "inclusionary" housing obligations on housing developers. California Building Industry Association v. City of San Jose (CBIA v. City of San Jose).

On March 2, 2013, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments released the draft plan Bay Area, the Bay Area's first integrated land use, housing and transportation plan prepared pursuant to SB 375.

On March 2, 2013, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) released the Draft Plan Bay Area (Plan), the California Bay Area's first integrated land use, housing and transportation plan prepared pursuant to SB 375.

On March 21, 2012, the California Supreme Court denied the petition for review and requests for depublication of the Second District Court of Appeal’s opinion in Ballona Wetlands Land Trust et al. v. City of Los Angeles (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 455 (Ballona Wetlands).

In one of the most notable decisions of 2011, the Second District Court of Appeal recently held in Ballona Wetlands Land Trust et al. v. City of Los Angeles1 that the environment’s effects on a proposed project do not have to be analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

On August 11, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued an order temporarily staying portions of the redevelopment legislation that would eliminate California redevelopment agencies (RDAs).

In a recent decision, "Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino" ("CBD") (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 866, the court held that an environmental impact report (EIR) prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a 160-acre open air composting facility was inadequate since, among other reasons, a water supply assessment had not been prepared as required by the Water Code.