Fonseca

Fonseca v. City of Gilroy

Good Law
148 Cal. App. 4th 1174·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 418·2007 Daily Journal DAR 3952·56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 374·2007 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3141
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 23, 2007H028369California14,431 words

Opinion

Opinion

Duffy, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment following the trial court’s denial of a petition for writ of mandate under Code of Civil Procedure section 1085. Plaintiffs Norma Fonseca and Terry Wilson sued the City of Gilroy and its city council to, among other things, set aside the City’s 2002 general plan on the basis that its housing element does not meet or substantially comply with the requirements of the “Housing Element Law” codified at Government Code sections 65580 through 655S9.8. On appeal, plaintiffs, who are appellants here, reprise their challenge to the City’s 2002 housing element. Specifically, they contend that Gilroy’s 2002 housing element: (1) violates section 65583, subdivision (a)(3), in that it does not contain an inventory of available residentiary zoned land identified by parcel or site, and it also fails to provide the required analysis of these sites; (2) violates former section 65583, subdivision (c)(1)(A), in that it does not identify adequate housing sites that will be made available to meet Gilroy’s allocated share of the regional housing need at all income levels for the 2001 through 2006 planning period; and (3) violates former section 65583,…

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.