ELR Citation: ELR 20272
No(s). B210789 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. Nov 23, 2009)

A California appellate court reversed a lower court decision denying developers' suit against a city challenging its extension of an ordinance restricting development in areas zoned for multifamily residential use. The extension was contrary to law and invalid because the city failed to identify "a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety" as required by the state's planning and zoning law. Although the city found that the need for affordable housing created "a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare" in general, the findings failed to identify any specific impact on public health or safety. The findings also failed to identify any "written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions" on which such an impact would be based. Moreover, the city council made no written finding that there was no feasible, less burdensome or restrictive alternative. Claims that the extension violated the California Environmental Quality Act, however, were moot.