-
YIMBY Law filed a lawsuit against the City of Burbank which illegally voted to block construction of an SB 35 compliant housing project. In July 2021, developers proposed a 96-unit townhome-style condominium project in Burbank, California.
SB 35 helps streamline the approval process for new homes when a city is not on track to meet state mandated housing goals. The developers on the proposed condominium project, known as the Pickwick Project, designed it specifically to qualify for streamlining under the provisions of SB 35.
When the Burbank City Council was deliberating over whether it should approve the Pickwick project or not, instead of recognizing that the city's planning staff and HCD had all determined that the project met the required standards of approval for SB-35, it unanimously denied the project.
-
On 2/1/2023, we filed a petition for court intervention against the City of Burlingame which failed to meet California State Housing Element Law. The City was supposed to submit its housing element by 1/31/2023, but they never even submitted a draft of a revised housing plan to comply with this mandate.
-
Is it even possible to downzone a single family area?
July 13th, 2020 Culver City City Council passed a downzoning that affects all single family residential districts in Culver City. In this case, YIMBY Law expanded our advocacy to the suburbs.
-
We, alongside the California Housing Defense Fund, petitioned for court intervention against the City of Cupertino on 2/3/2023. The City failed to meet California’s Housing Element deadline for the Bay Area. Their housing plan was due on 1/31/2023 and the City failed to complete it, nor submit a draft revision of the current housing plan. Petitioners sent a letter to the City stating that litigation would be forgone if the City acknowledged their lack of compliance and does not block builder’s remedy projects.
-
On 2/1/2023 we petitioned the court the pursue action against the Town of Fairfax. Fairfax did not comply with the State’s Housing Element Law that was to go into effect by 1/31/2023. The Town did not even publish a draft revision to comply with this law. The Town was sent a letter on 12/16/2022 stating that if they acknowledged their lack of compliance and were unallowed to reject housing development plans until they meet the housing element, litigation would be foregone.
-
YIMBY Law and YIMBY Action filed suit against the California Department of Housing and Community Development for its failure to include the jobs-housing balance in its Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) methodology for the San Francisco Bay Area, contrary to state law. In particular, HCD ignored the housing element law requiring the state make housing goals that will achieve a “feasible jobs-housing balance” in the SF Bay Area Region.
-
A developer in Lafayette submitted an application for a multi-family residential project with 315 housing units (“the Terraces”). More than two years after the application was deemed complete, the City directed City staff to converse with the Developer, which resulted in the Developer to suspend the Terraces application and move forward with a 44-45 single family home project known as the Homes at Deer Hill instead.
We argued that the City violated the Housing Accountability Act by proposing the Developer bring forward a project 85% less dense than the original proposal to be approved instead.
-
In 2018, legislators passed a very powerful amendment to the Housing Accountability Act requiring cities to allow housing developments at the density that is allowed in the General Plan, even if the zoning only allows lower densities. Unfortunately, LA ignored this new law.
On May 19, 2020, a developer submitted an application to develop a multi-family housing development at 5353 Del Moreno Drive, including one commercial unit and 67 residential units, with seven (7) units designated for very-low income households. The City of LA refused to accept the SB 330 Application because it was incompatible with the zoning, violating the HAA in the process.
-
YIMBY Law supported San Mateo County’s effort to convert a hotel into permanent supportive housing in Millbrae, CA. On January 8th, 2024, we answered a lawsuit filed by the City of Millbrae, which intended to block San Mateo County from moving forward on the project.
The City of Millbrae used Article 34, a decades-old provision in the California constitution designed to bolster racial segregation. The precedent in this case will help to protect future affordable housing projects from constitutional challenge.
-
The City of Newport Beach has included 4400 Von Karmen Ave. in its Housing Element since 2007. In effect, for almost 15 years, the City of Newport Beach has promised the California Department of Community and Economic Development (HCD) that this site is available to developers wishing to build housing. Finally, in 2021, a proposal for 312 new apartments was approved.
Olenicoff Properties–a developer that owns a 52,000 sq. ft. office building adjacent to the development site–argued Newport Beach should have denied approval of the 4400 Von Karmen Ave. housing project because it didn't comply with the City's general plan standards, claiming it didn’t include a required “neighborhood park” with a “150-foot minimum dimension” and that it had more homes than the general plan allowed it to.
-
For 10 years, the City of Santa Monica and a private developer worked to redevelop a 4.7 acre site at the end of Wilshire Boulevard. Developer hoped to replace the existing hotel while also constructing 60 market rate homes and 42 affordable homes. The City had been consistently supportive of the project, had long listed the site as a potential location for residential development, and ultimately approved entitlements for the project in 2020.
After the approvals, a lawsuit was initiated by the homeowners association of the adjacent condominium complex, alleging that the approvals violated the local coastal plan and that the City violated the California Environmental Quality Act.
YIMBY Law decided to intervene in the lawsuit to support the city and the developer against the HOA because we recognize that the city of Santa Monica needs to be able to fulfill its RHNA obligations by approving housing projects on designated sites.
-
Is Group Housing – housing?
A developer proposed constructing and operating a 108-unit residential care facility with 68 assisted living units and 40 memory care units on a vacant 1.6-acre portion of a 19.2-acre site on Cochran Street. The remaining 17.6-acres is proposed to remain undeveloped. The Simi Valley City Council turned down the proposed project, claiming the Housing Accountability Act does not apply because assisted living isn’t housing.
Winning lawsuits means more homes are built for people.
Achieving compliance with new pro-housing laws is dependent upon the existence of enforcement mechanisms, something that has only developed in recent years due to YIMBY organizing and support.
Years of housing law neglect and obstructionist behavior (NIMBYism) have taken a toll on housing production and have caused housing shortages for people at all income levels in communities across the United States.
YIMBY Action chapters and members, state and local lawmakers, and pro-housing community organizations advocate for housing laws to address the housing shortage and strengthen compliance. These laws provide clear accountability measures and guidelines for cities to follow so that more homes are built and more people are housed.
The critical next step to achieving housing for all is to ensure these guidelines are followed. Cities and counties now have a job to do and YIMBY Law is here to make sure they do it.
A street level rendering of homes proposed on Stevenson st in san francisco.
A rendering of townhomes in burbank, ca.
a Rendering of the olivia, a housing project for people 55+.
A rendering of homes proposed on o’farrel st in san francisco.