City of Oceanside v. McKenna

Good Law
1989 Cal. App. LEXIS 1201·215 Cal. App. 3d 1420·264 Cal. Rptr. 275
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 22, 1989D008264California4,647 words

Opinion

Opinion

Todd, J.

Here, we consider whether the covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) of a publicly subsidized condominium project validly can require owner occupancy and forbid the leasing of units. Michael Shawn McKenna appeals from a judgment against him on the City of Oceanside’s (City) suit for injunctive and declaratory relief seeking to enforce such restrictions at the Sea Village condominium project, a part of the City’s downtown redevelopment program.

Facts

Sea Village is a condominium project that was developed on property within the coastal zone as part of the City’s residential waterfront housing portion of the downtown redevelopment project. The redevelopment project included plans to demolish residential dwelling units occupied by persons of low and moderate income located within the coastal zone. The City’s Community Development Commission (Commission) purchased the property upon which Sea Village was developed for $1,100,000 and sold it to Oceanside Beach Partners for $300,000. Oceanside Beach Partners was required to construct Sea Village as replacement dwellings pursuant to the City’s housing plan and Government Code section 65590, which mandates replacement…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.