What are zoning violations?

Useful Rulings on Zoning Violations & Permissive Zoning

Recent Rulings on Zoning Violations & Permissive Zoning

DARBY T. KEEN VS CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH, ET AL.

Collateral Attack The City argues that the instant action is an impermissible collateral attack on the City’s system of permissive zoning. Under the City’s permissive zoning code, the City has always prohibited STRs as a use in residential zones. AR 547. Petitioner’s recasting of Ordinance 19-0007 as an STR ban is contradicted by the facts.

  • Hearing

    Jun 25, 2020

DEL MAR ALLIANCE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF BEACH ACCESS AND VILLAGE VS CITY OF DEL MAR [E-FILE]

The City argues it has a permissive zoning code which does not expressly allow STRs. A permissive zoning code is one in which a particular use of land is not allowed unless it is expressly designated in the zoning code as a permissible use. City of Corona v. Naulls (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 418, 433. STRs are neither listed nor expressly prohibited in the Zoning Code. AR 2891, 2989; 3076-3082.

  • Hearing

    Dec 19, 2019

DEL MAR ALLIANCE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF BEACH ACCESS AND VILLAGE VS CITY OF DEL MAR [E-FILE]

The City argues it has a permissive zoning code which does not expressly allow STRs. A permissive zoning code is one in which a particular use of land is not allowed unless it is expressly designated in the zoning code as a permissible use. City of Corona v. Naulls (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 418, 433. STRs are neither listed nor expressly prohibited in the Zoning Code. AR 2891, 2989; 3076-3082.

  • Hearing

    Dec 12, 2019

JESSE BOGGS VS CITY OF PASADENA ET AL

The first cause of action alleges that the City’s abused its discretion because the decision makes no reference to the evidence submitted, identified no reasons to uphold the citations, failed to set forth findings that bridge the analytic gap between the raw evidence and the ultimate decision, did not discuss the credibility of the witnesses, the Hearing Officer did not permit Boggs’ counsel to fully cross-examine Pollard, and the City improperly relied on a theory of permissive zoning to create a total ban

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2019

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

ELIZABETH DIANE MCDUFFIE VS CITY OF PASADENA ET AL

The first cause of action alleges that the City’s abused its discretion because the decision makes no reference to the evidence submitted, identified no reasons to uphold the citations, failed to set forth findings that bridge the analytic gap between the raw evidence and the ultimate decision, did not discuss the credibility of the witnesses, the Hearing Officer did not permit McDuffie’ counsel to fully cross-examine Pollard, and the City improperly relied on a theory of permissive zoning to create a total

  • Hearing

    Jun 27, 2019

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS VENICE SUITES LLC

In other words, Plaintiff contends that the HSO demonstrates that the Court “misapplied the LAMC’s permissive zoning scheme.”[1] (Mot., p. 7:8-9.) Defendants dispute whether the remaining UCL and false advertising causes of action even require a determination of whether allowing short-term rental use at 417 OFW is illegal.

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2019

DEL MAR ALLIANCE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF BEACH ACCESS AND VILLAGE VS CITY OF DEL MAR [E-FILE]

The City has a permissive zoning code. Resolution, p. 3, ¶ 6. Thus, a particular use of land is not allowed unless it is expressly designated in the zoning code as a permissible use. City of Corona v. Naulls (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 418, 433. The Alliance does not allege or argue that the zoning code expressly permits STRs. The Resolution merely recognizes that the zoning code does not expressly designate STRs as a permissible use; it does not change their status under the zoning code.

  • Hearing

    Dec 13, 2018

DEL MAR ALLIANCE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF BEACH ACCESS AND VILLAGE VS CITY OF DEL MAR [E-FILE]

The City has a permissive zoning code. Resolution, p. 3, ¶ 6. Thus, a particular use of land is not allowed unless it is expressly designated in the zoning code as a permissible use. City of Corona v. Naulls (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 418, 433. The Alliance does not allege or argue that the zoning code expressly permits STRs. The Resolution merely recognizes that the zoning code does not expressly designate STRs as a permissible use; it does not change their status under the zoning code.

  • Hearing

    Dec 13, 2018

JESSE BOGGS VS CITY OF PASADENA ET AL

The first alleges that the City’s abused its discretion because the decision made no reference to the evidence, identified no reasons to uphold the citations, failed to set forth findings that bridge the analytic gap between the raw evidence and the ultimate decision, did not discuss the credibility of the witnesses, the hearing officer did not permit Boggs’ counsel to fully cross-examine Jon Pollard, and the City relied on a theory of permissive zoning to create a total ban against a medical marijuana collective

  • Hearing

    Nov 20, 2018

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

CANDIDO VASQUEZ VS QUALITY PRODUCTIONS SERVICES INC

MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE County argues that the cases involve overlapping parties, including GEC and County, and arise out of the same transaction or occurrence discussed above; namely, Defendants wrongfully operating a medical marijuana dispensary in violation of County’s ban on marijuana dispensaries and of County’s permissive zoning code. County argues that the case in YC071962 is for declaratory and injunctive relief as to GEC’s rights under those and other marijuana laws.

  • Hearing

    Jan 09, 2018

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS. SALLEE

San Diego, operates under a "permissive" zoning scheme. If a particular use is not specifically named as a permitted use in any given zone, it is an unpermitted use. Property owners and tenants are strictly liable for all code violations. In San Diego, MMDs, cooperatives and collectives are regulated by SDMC § 141.0614 and Chapter 4, Article 2, Division 15 – collectively referred to as the Medical Marijuana Consumer Cooperatives ordinance ("MMCC").

  • Hearing

    May 25, 2017

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

CITY OF SAN DIEGO VS. SALLEE

San Diego operates under a "permissive" zoning scheme. If a particular use is not specifically named as a permitted use in any given zone, it is an unpermitted use. MMDs, cooperatives and collectives are regulated by SDMC § 141.0614 and Chapter 4, Article 2, Division 15 – collectively referred to as the Medical Marijuana Consumer Cooperatives ordinance ("MMCC"). The MMCC provides that marijuana cooperatives may be permitted with a conditional use permit in certain zones in the City.

  • Hearing

    Aug 18, 2016

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

1

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.