Meza

Meza v. City of Ontario CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 20, 2014G050058California1,911 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ikola, J.

FACTS

The facts below are taken from Meza’s complaint and the judicially noticed documents. In November 2007 Ontario approved a project to demolish an existing shopping center with several dilapidated and vacant buildings and build a Wal-Mart Supercenter on the land. In connection with that approval, Ontario approved a development plan and conditional use permit. The development plan was approved for two years: “Development Plan approval shall become null and void two (2) years

2 following the effective date of application approval, unless a building permit is issued and construction is commenced, and diligently pursued toward completion.” The conditional use permit was likewise granted for two years: “Conditional Use Permit approval has been granted in conjunction with Development Plan . . . approval. Application approval shall become null and void consistent with the time limits for the Development Plan (two (2) years following the effective date of application approval), unless: [¶] (a) All conditions of approval have been complied with and the approved use has commenced; or [¶] (b) Prior to the expiration date, a time extension request is filed with the Planning Department…

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.