Building Permit Issues
The lawyers at Kassouni Law are passionate about zoning & development law and the protection of private enterprise. Our seasoned legal team can assist you in reversing building permit denials and excessive fees, so your project can proceed as originally planned and designed. This is usually accomplished by a court proceeding called a petition for writ of mandate.
Additionally, local governments often attempt to impose excessive permit fees, , and other conditions in exchange for a permit. However, under California law, these types of fees and conditions must be directly related to the impact created by the proposed development. If they are not, the property owner has legal recourse.
Whether you choose Kassouni Law for legal representation or not, our zoning and development attorneys offer a suggestion for your consideration. It is very important for legal counsel to be involved as soon as problems arise, so that all development options can be preserved and not waived. Kassouni Law often acts as mediator between developer and the planning department, resolving the issue before going to the courtroom.
Further, a project must satisfy the and exhaustion of administrative remedies requirements before it can be litigated in court. But should your case reach the trial court stage, our team of attorneys will be ready to advocate for your property and development rights before a judge and jury.
With offices in Sacramento and Los Angeles, the attorneys serve clients in both the Northern and Southern Californian areas. If you wish to discuss your case with an experienced land use, zoning and development lawyer give us a call at 877-770-7379. Lawyer Timothy Kassouni will speak with you personally.
Kassouni Law In The News:
Land use lawyer Timothy Kassouni recently obtained a ruling from the Alameda County Superior Court after a six day trial that Measure D, a voter-approved growth control initiative, violated the Fifth Amendment and State Constitutional rights of a storage facility company. The development was allowed completion, and damages in the amount of $1.5 million are sought.
Exactions are the conditions that the government imposes as a "quid pro quo" in exchange for granting a property owner a permit for development. Many governmental entities get so carried away with extreme demands that the exaction imposed is nothing but a disguised form of "extortion," as recognized by the United States Supreme Court in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission. In response to this abuse, California adopted the Mitigation Fee Act, which requires that a fee be related to the impact created by the project. However, abuses continue to occur every day.
Every property owner who is having challenges with the government must understand the ripeness doctrine. Before a Fifth Amendment taking case can be brought, the property owner must have obtained a final determination of the type and intensity of development that the government will allow. This is not always obvious, and many governments purposely attempt to leave this an open issue, thus precluding the property owner from litigating in court. Timothy Kassouni wrote a leading law review article on this subject in 1992, and can assist in evaluating whether this requirement has been satisfied.