Table I:
Local Land Use Decisions and Judicial Standards of Review
Adjudicative Acts (also known as quasi-judicial, adjudicatory, and administrative)
Reviewed under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5
Conditional Use Permits (Essick v. City of Los Angeles)
Variances (Topanga v. Co. of Los Angeles)
Coastal Zone Development Permits (Natural Resources Defense Council,
Inc. v. California Coastal Zone Conservation Commission)
Private Development Plans, when coupled with a tentative subdivision map
(Mountain Defense League v. Board of Supervisors)
Tentative Subdivision Maps (Big Rock Mesas v. Board of Supervisors)
Tentative Parcel and Subdivision Maps (Horn v. Ventura)
Williamson Act Contract Cancellations (Sierra Club v. Hayward; Government
Code Section 51282.1[a])
Local Coastal Programs (City of Chula Vista v. Superior Court)
Condo Conversion Permit Issuance under Conversion Ordinance (separate permit
from tentative map) (Rasmussen v. City Council of the City of Tiburon)
Certificate of Compliance Issuance (Pescosolido v. Smith)
Development Allotment Per Growth Control Ordinance (Pacifica Corp. v.
City of Camarillo)
Resolution of Development Project consistency with local General Plan (Guardians
of Turlock's Integrity v. Turlock City Council)
Tentative Map Time Extension (Griffis v. County of Mono)
Habitat Conservation Plan Amendments, pursuant to the Federal Endangered
Species Act (W.W. Dean & Associates v. City of South San Francisco)
CEQA decisions requiring public hearings, acceptance of evidence, and local
decision making body's discretion in determining facts; courts will determine
whether substantial evidence supports the decision (Public Resources Code
Section 21168)
Legislative Acts (also known as quasi-legislative)
Reviewed under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1085
Airport Land Use Plans (City of Coachella v. Riverside County Airport
Land Use Commission)
Water District Annexations and Exclusions (Wilson v. Hidden Valley Municipal
Water District)
Certain types of Planned Unit Development, including Project Precise Plans,
Floating Zones, and
Cluster Zones (Millbrae Association for Residential Survival v. City
of Millbrae [dicta*] and Orinda Homeowners Committee v. Board of
Supervisors [dicta*])
Rezoning and Zoning Ordinance Amendments (Ensign Bickford Realty v. City
Council; Arnel v. Costa Mesa; and, Orinda Homeowners Committee
v. Board of Supervisors)
General Plan Adoption and Amendments (Karlson v. Camarillo and Duran
v. Cassidy)
LAFCO Detachments (Simi Valley Recreation and Park District v. LAFCO)
Special Assessment District Establishment (Dawson v. Los Altos Hills)
Annexations (City of Santa Cruz v. LAFCO)
LAFCO Boundary Decisions, e.g., Reorganizations, Dissolutions, Consolidations,
and
Incorporations (Morro Hills Community Services District v. Board of Supervisors)
Road Abandonments (Heist v. County of Colusa)
Specific Plans, even where adopted as an implementation tool of a Local
Coastal Plan (Yost v.
Thomas and Mitchell v. Orange County)
Habitat Conservation Plans and Habitat Conservation Plan Agreements pursuant
to the Federal
Endangered Species Act (W.W. Dean & Associates v. City of South San
Francisco)
CEQA decisions not requiring public hearings or acceptance of evidence;
courts are limited to inquiry of prejudicial abuse of discretion (Public
Resources Code Section 21168.5)
* Dicta are incidental comments in a court opinion that are not necessarily
essential to determining the case at hand.
Return to Table of Contents
Prepared by:
State of California
Governor's Office of Planning and Research
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
916-322-2318