Aetna Realty, et al. v. City of South San Francisco
Published: Nov. 4, 2003 | Result Date: Sep. 9, 2003 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 411816 Bench Decision – $0
Facts
The plaintiffs purchased 25.4 hillside acres on the north side of Sign Hill in the City of South San Francisco in 1990. Sign Hill is a national historic landmark and the city's best known feature. The property was designated as open space and zoned to allow a development density of up to one unit per acre. Between 1990 and 1997, the plaintiffs submitted four applications for development at densities several times in excess of those allowed by the city's General Plan and zoning. The city determined that each of the applications were incomplete because they lacked sufficient information regarding the proposed development. In 1999, the city updated its General Plan. The updated General Plan retained the open space designation and allowable development density for the plaintiff's property, but added a discretionary policy expressing a preference against the clustering of development on the hillside.
Result
After a hearing on the plaintiffs' petition for writ of mandate, the court determined that the city's update of its General Plan complied with the State Planning and Zoning Law. Subsequently, the court granted the city's motion for summary adjudication on the plaintiff's due process claims. The plaintiffs' regulatory taking and equal protection claims were dismissed following a bench trial on the grounds that these claims were not ripe for adjudication.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390