CALPROP CORPORATION v. City of San Diego

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 19·2000 Daily Journal DAR 455·77 Cal. App. 4th 582·91 Cal. Rptr. 2d 792·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 369
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 12, 2000D031965, D032263, D032642California6,776 words

Opinion

Opinion

Benke, J.

In these consolidated cases the plaintiff property owners argue the defendant city has taken their land by virtue of a series of planning decisions it made with respect to the area where the plaintiffs’ land is located. As it did in the trial court, the city contends that it has not acted upon any proposed development of the parcels in a manner which demonstrates the level of development, if any, the city is willing to permit on the plaintiffs’ land. Thus, the city argues the plaintiffs’ takings claim are not ripe. We agree with the city and affirm the trial court’s judgments entered on orders granting the city’s motions for summary judgment.

Factual Background

A. 1960-1971

These appeals concern an undeveloped portion of the City of San Diego formerly part of a naval reservation known as Camp Elliott and now known as the East Elliott community. It is a large tract bounded by State Route 52 and Mission Trails Regional Park on the south, the City of Santee on the east and Miramar Marine Air Station on the north and west.

In 1964, after litigation with the city with respect to the appropriate parcelization of the land, the federal government offered land in East Elliott…

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.