In Snowball West Investments L.P. v. City of Los Angeles (2023) 96 Cal.App.5th 1054, the Second District Court of Appeal addressed the “rezoning exemption” of the Housing Accountability Act (HAA), finding that a housing project was required to comply with a zoning density limit even though the applicable general plan allowed for higher residential density on the site.
Snowball West Investments LP (“Snowball”) proposed a 215-unit housing project in the City of Los Angeles (“City”). While this was consistent with the maximum density allowed by the general plan, the property’s zoning capped the allowed units on the site at 19 single-family homes. Snowball asked the City to change the zoning to permit higher density, but the request was denied.
Snowball then asked the City to process the project as proposed, claiming that they could build 215 units without a rezone under the rezoning exemption in the HAA (Gov. Code, 65589.5(j)(4)). The City disagreed and denied Snowball’s request. Snowball filed suit. The trial court denied the petition and Snowball appealed.
Pursuant to the provision relied on by Snowball, a housing development project need not seek a rezone if the project is consistent with the general plan, “but the zoning for the site is inconsistent with the general plan.” Snowball argued that zoning designations applicable to the site were inconsistent with the general plan because they were not listed as corresponding to the land use designation. In opposition, the City relied on a footnote in the community plan (a part of the general plan). While each land use designated had corresponding zones listed in the community plan, the City explained that it interpreted the...
