Cal App: Landgate's "Substantially Advance" Standard Isn't The Takings Test (But The Property Owner Still Loses)

One more lesson on the speed of the interwebs: we were all set to take a deep dive into the California Court of Appeal's opinion in an inverse condemnation case, Bottini v. City of San Diego, No. D071670 (Sep. 18, 2018), when our colleague Brad Kuhn analyzed the case at his California Eminent Domain Report blog.  The title of Brad's post, "Improper CEQA Determination Does Not Trigger Regulatory Taking," tells you most of what you need to know. The short story is that the City asserted that Bottini's planned demolition of a beach bungalow as part of a project to build a new house required assessment and analysis under California's environmental reporting statute, CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act). Bottini disagreed, asserting the demolition was exempt from CEQA, and, by the way, the delay caused by the City's wrongful assertion of CEQA authority was a temporary taking.  As Brad writes, "[t]he Court of Appeal agreed…

Read more detail on Recent Real Estate and Property Law posts –

Related news:

This entry was posted in Real Estate & Property Law and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply