Ehrlich

Ehrlich v. City of Culver City

Good Law
15 Cal. App. 4th 1737·19 Cal. Rptr. 2d 468·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 552·93 Daily Journal DAR 6574·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3839
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 25, 1993B055523California8,809 words

Opinion

Opinion

Grignon, J.

This case involves the imposition of two fees on a developer by a municipality as conditions of approval of a development project: (1) a $280,000 fee to mitigate the impact of a land-use change (the mitigation fee); and (2) a $33,220 fee in lieu of a requirement that art be placed on the development project (the in lieu art fee). The City of Culver City, the City Council of Culver City and members of the City Council of Culver City (collectively the City) appeal from the judgment of the trial court issuing a writ of mandate invalidating the mitigation fee imposed by the City against Richard K. Ehrlich (the developer) in exchange for approval of a 30-unit townhome development located in the City (the development project). The City contends the mitigation fee was a constitutionally permissible monetary exaction reasonably related to a legitimate public purpose. The developer contends the mitigation fee was an unconstitutional taking of his property, which did not substantially advance a legitimate public purpose directly related to the approval of the development project. The City also contends the trial court erred by releasing its lien against the developer’s property and…

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.