AWH Burbank Hotel v. Hollywood Way SHG CA2/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 18, 2021B308035California3,476 words

Opinion

Opinion

facts.

3 that the size, number, location, and uses of such replacement buildings (including the orientation of entrances thereto) are such that each Parcel will generally support its own parking needs in accordance with all legal requirements.” Section 6.21 provides, “The parties may not permanently change or agree to change permanently parking, access, building locations, or driveways in violation of applicable laws and codes, including, without limitation, the provisions of Planned Development 89-1. To assure compliance with this Section 6.21, all such changes shall be approved by the Community Development Director of the City of Burbank.” “Planned Development 89-1” refers to the City of Burbank’s zoning of the two properties. The REA grants reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in any action for breach of the agreement.

2. The Dispute On June 3, 2016, pursuant to section 3.1 of the REA, Burbank Hotel requested Hollywood Way’s consent to relocate and reconfigure some of the hotel property’s driveways. Counsel for Hollywood Way responded in an e-mail on June 8, 2016, that Hollywood Way was “studying” the proposed changes to the driveways “and will respond…

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.