Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />June 27, 2022 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />In recent years, there have been a number of successful lawsuits to enforce these rules: <br /> In Honchariw, 200 Cal. App. 4th 1066, the Court of Appeal vacated the County of <br />Stanislaus’s denial of an application to subdivide a parcel into eight lots for the <br />development of market-rate housing. The court held that the county did not identify <br />any objective standards that the proposed subdivision would not meet, and therefore <br />violated the Housing Accountability Act in denying the application. <br /> In Eden Housing, Inc. v. Town of Los Gatos, Santa Clara County Superior Court <br />Case No. 16CV300733, the court determined that Los Gatos had improperly denied <br />a subdivision application based on subjective factors. The court found that the <br />factors cited by the town, such as the quality of the site design, the unit mix, and <br />the anticipated cost of the units, were not objective because they did not refer to <br />specific, mandatory criteria to which the applicant could conform. <br /> San Francisco Bay Area Renters Federation v. Berkeley City Council , Alameda <br />County Superior Court Case No. RG16834448, was the final in a series of cases <br />relating to Berkeley’s denial of an application to build three single family homes <br />and its pretextual denial of a demolition permit to enable the project. The Court <br />ordered the city to approve the project and to pay $44,000 in attorneys’ fees. <br /> In 40 Main Street Offices v. City of Los Altos, Santa Clara County Superior Court <br />Consolidated Case Nos. 19CV349845 & 19CV350422, the court determined that <br />the Los Altos violated the Housing Accountability Act, among other state housing <br />laws, by failing to identify objective land use criteria to justify denying a mixed- <br />use residential and commercial project. The City was ultimately forced to pay <br />approximately $1 million in delay compensation and attorneys’ fees in the case. <br /> In Californians for Homeownership v. City of Huntington Beach, Orange County <br />Superior Court Case No. 30-2019-01107760-CU-WM-CJC, a case brought by our <br />organization, the court ruled that Huntington Beach violated the Housing <br />Accountability Act when it rejected a 48-unit condominium project based on vague <br />concerns about health and safety. Following the decision, the City agreed to pay <br />$600,000 in attorneys’ fees to our organization and two other plaintiffs. <br />In other cases, localities have settled lawsuits by agreeing to approve the subject projects <br />and pay tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal expenses. <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Christian Garcia <br /> <br /> <br />