Real Estate & Housing

Defense of SCAG against a city’s challenge to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation assigned to it. A dispositive motion rejected the attempt to use the federal courts to stall housing development, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal, and the firm defeated the plaintiffs’ petition for a writ of certiorari as lead counsel before the United States Supreme Court, which called for briefing and then denied review. The result sustains the process by which California allocates its housing obligations.

Cities throughout California are under intense pressure to meet strict housing targets set by Sacramento. When local rules stand in the way, the consequences are serious, ranging from costly delays and substantial fines to potential state intervention. We secured a major legal victory for the City of Newport Beach in a case with broad implications for cities across California. Petitioners challenged the City’s implementation of its state-mandated Housing Element, arguing it violated the city charter by bypassing a voter approval requirement. The court, however, ruled in favor of the City, holding that state housing law preempts local procedures when they conflict with compliance obligations (Read Press Release).

Defeated four separate CEQA lawsuits against the Frank Gehry-designed, 330,000 square foot mixed-use high-rise on the Sunset Strip. The Governor designated the project an Environmental Leadership Development Project, which required every challenge to be resolved within 270 days of approval. The development includes two residential buildings carrying affordable and low-income housing, retail and entertainment space, and public open space.

In Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of Berkeley (S201116, March 2, 2015), the California Supreme Court resolved years of uncertainty by holding that there must be “unusual circumstances” for an otherwise categorically exempt project to be subject to CEQA. The Court also resolved a divide among the Courts of Appeal, holding that an agency’s findings as to unusual circumstances are reviewed for substantial evidence, and it established a new two-part test for analyzing a project opponent’s assertion that a project presents unusual circumstances requiring CEQA review.

Meyers Nave represented Lotus founder Mitch Kapor and Freada Kapor-Klein in the case, which drew extensive coverage describing it as “the biggest CEQA case the state’s high court will consider,” “a landmark CEQA case…to determine the fundamental legal nature and practical utility of CEQA’s regulatory exemptions,” and a case affecting “how public agencies handle common exemptions from California’s bedrock environmental law.”

We serve LAWA on a broad range of high-stakes real property and land use matters, including negotiating and drafting leases and licenses for solar panel installations as part of LAWA’s Sustainability Action Plan (one of the largest in the LA Basin), negotiating EV charging station leases near LAX, and in the long-term lease of the Airtel Hotel at Van Nuys.

We have represented the University of California in many critical housing projects, including:

• Multi-Campus Long-Range Development Plans & Implementation. Meyers Nave has advised UC on the CEQA review of a new generation of Long Range Development Plans to guide future development to accommodate enrollment growth of tens of thousands of new students on campuses throughout the UC system, including UC Los Angeles, UC Berkeley, UC Davis, UC Santa Cruz, UC Riverside, UC San Diego, and UC Irvine–including many housing projects.
• UC Berkeley: Landmark Supreme Court Victory for People’s Park Housing. We secured a unanimous California Supreme Court ruling in a landmark CEQA case, clearing the way for a major UC Berkeley housing project (Read Press Release Here).
• UC Merced 2020 Project. Meyers Nave delivered the $1.2 billion Merced 2020 project, the largest P3 social infrastructure project in U.S. history. We crafted a forward-thinking master plan, negotiated innovative utility and transportation agreements, and addressed critical wetland requirements with local governments. This enables Merced, UC’s newest and fastest-growing campus, to support up to 10,000 students.
• UC Santa Cruz: Student Housing West Project. Meyers Nave guided UC Santa Cruz through the preparation of an EIR for two student housing projects at UC Santa Cruz, accommodating approximately 3,000 students through a P3 delivery model. We successfully defended the EIR against five lawsuits and are currently representing UC in two court of appeal cases challenging the project approvals.
• UC Berkeley: University Village Project
  We advised UC in a CEQA challenge to the City’s approval of the University Village project, which includes a 175-unit senior housing facility, 80,000 square feet of retail space, a grocery store, parking, pedestrian and bike paths, and stormwater drainage facilities.

We represent VTA on a wide range of real estate, land use, environmental, and litigation challenges for major transit-oriented developments.

Negotiated the purchase and sale, environmental mitigation and affordable housing agreements for Mather Veterans Village, 70 units for senior and disabled veterans and homeless families, drawing more than $30 million in state and federal funding including Homekey+. Related work includes Asteria Flats, a 236-unit affordable development supported by a $5 million city loan, and Mills Crossing, a mixed-use transit-oriented public-private partnership with a community arts center, health and wellness center, 100 residential units and a public plaza.

Drafted the City’s rent control, just-cause eviction, tenant protection and anti-harassment ordinances, balancing landlord and tenant interests against state and federal law. The firm also assists staff in processing SB 330 and Density Bonus Law applications and advises on the housing element update and rent stabilization.

Prevailed at the trial court in both a writ proceeding and a related declaratory relief action defending the City’s mobile home rental ordinance, and is handling the subsequent appeals before the California Court of Appeal.

Two related disputes with a developer concerning SB 330 and litigation over the conditions of approval imposed on a large housing development, together with the successful defense of a constitutional challenge to the City’s COVID-19 emergency ordinance restricting residential evictions and actions to recover unpaid rent.

Overturned a local denial of a housing project under the Housing Accountability Act, with the trial court granting a writ of mandate ordering the City of Los Angeles to approve the project.

The California Supreme Court decision in Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412 set the statewide standard for how an EIR must analyze water supply for long-range development, in a plan contemplating roughly 20,000 new dwellings across 6,000 rural acres. The firm then prepared the supplemental EIR under the court’s new rubric and applied the same standard to municipal EIRs across California.

The City declined to annex a 555-acre unincorporated property and rejected the project mid-review. The developer asserted CEQA and civil rights violations and sought more than $100 million in compensatory damages. The City’s demurrer was sustained and the Court of Appeal affirmed in a published decision at (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 837.

Defense of large residential approvals against CEQA and planning law challenges, including a 2,393-unit residential and commercial project on 530 acres in Rancho Cordova, which produced a published decision; a 2,694-unit project on 1,926 acres in Desert Hot Springs raising CEQA and Subdivision Map Act claims; and Schellinger Brothers v. City of Sebastopol (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 1245, which clarified a lead agency’s right to complete adequate environmental review even where the process exceeds one year.

We are advising the County on a new, master-planned community to develop up to 19,333 dwelling units and 8.4 million square feet of non-residential uses. Our extensive services included review of the EIR and a Supplemental EIR; review and drafting of CEQA findings; all aspects of the entitlement process, including negotiating a project Development Agreement and affordable housing program; staff reports; and Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors resolutions. Our attorneys subsequently defended the County in two lawsuits brought by three petitioners. The County was successful on numerous issues at trial, including all issues raised by the Center for Biological Diversity and the California Native Plant Society. Appeals and cross-appeals are currently pending in the Second District Court of Appeal.

• Medical Center Master Plan and Development Project. We serve as real estate, land use, and environmental counsel to Riverside University Health System in connection with the long-term expansion of the RUHS Medical Center in Moreno Valley. The 30-year, multi-phase project is guided by a Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR). We are leading the project’s environmental compliance, including preparation of the PEIR, and providing associated land use and real estate services.
• $580 Behavioral Health Campus. We are outside real estate and land use counsel for the Riverside University Health System’s Mead Valley Wellness Village Project, a $580 million behavioral health facility, including leases and development agreements with a P3 partner, as well as CEQA review and other land use and environmental services.

We served the City of Anaheim as litigation counsel related to the proposed sale of the Angel Stadium property, successfully resolving complex real property and contract issues between stakeholders, and in the sale of air space owned jointly with a private party, successfully completing a sale the City had been trying to accomplish for many years.

We secured a precedent-setting appellate victory for SANDAG and developers across California tackling the housing crisis, ruling that the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) process is immune from judicial review.

Our attorneys advised the City of Seaside on CEQA and land use issues for the 120-acre Campus Town Specific Plan, a major mixed-use development near Cal State Monterey Bay. The project includes 1,500 homes, 200,000 square feet of commercial space, and 250 hotel rooms on the former Fort Ord site. We reviewed the Specific Plan and EIR, helping align the project with the City’s General Plan and long-term revitalization goals. When the EIR was challenged on multiple CEQA grounds, including water, traffic, air quality, and public services, we successfully defended the City, securing a full demurrer on all twelve causes of action.

Currently advising the City of Brisbane on all aspects of the Sierra Point Towers and Life Science Project, including legal review of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and entitlement processing. The proposed development includes the construction of a 1.2-million-square-foot mixed-use project featuring a 12-story, 508,000-square-foot hotel with 608 guest rooms and a separate 11-story, 658,000-square-foot life sciences building. The life sciences building would accommodate up to 50% research and development (R&D) uses and 50% office uses. The entitlement process includes a Design Review Permit for new structures, a Zoning Amendment to modify the site plan and height limit, Variances to allow increased lot coverage and off-site parking, a Conditional Use Permit for parking modifications, and a Tentative Map to adjust the parcel configuration.

Meyers Nave achieved a major appellate court victory for the San Diego Association Of Governments, protecting housing allocation process from judicial review. The Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District issued its published decision holding that the RHNA allocation process for new housing units is immune from judicial review. The case involves a writ action brought by four cities in the San Diego region challenging their share of new housing units allotted to them under the most recent RHNA cycle. The cities brought suit against Meyers Nave client, the San Diego Association of Governments (“SANDAG”), demanding a new hearing and a do over of the final RHNA allocation numbers for the entire region, arguing that the use of a “weighted vote” process and alleged bias among Board members denied them a fair hearing.

We assisted with property acquisition and simultaneous negotiation and preparation of a retail leases for a $13,000,000 commercial real estate purchase in the City of Pasadena.

Meyers Nave represents a Los-Angeles based real estate investment firm in negotiation and preparation of dozens of commercial lease agreements for tens of thousands of square feet throughout Los Angeles County.

We facilitated the purchase of a $9,000,000 commercial office building in the City of Burbank and prepared commercial office leases for 15+ tenants at the Property. In another matter, Meyers Nave facilitated the purchase of a commercial office building in the City of Los Angeles for $10,000,000.

We negotiate and prepare commercial office leases for State Farm franchisees in the City of Los Angeles.

We served as lead construction counsel on the City’s Navigation Center Project.

Meyers Nave represented the City in CEQA litigation over redevelopment of the iconic Crossroads of the World site on Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood. The plan, approved by the L.A.

Meyers Nave serves as a primary outside land use and environmental litigation counsel to the City of Los Angeles in a number of cases challenging land use and CEQA approvals for a wide range of projects that are part of the City’s long-range efforts to revitalize the downtown area.

Gardner v. City of Sebastopol – Bench Trial June 1994. Meyers Nave was co-counsel in a lawsuit brought by a developer of a proposed 48-unit multifamily housing project. The City denied the project and the developer sued the City on ground of discrimination against affordable housing.

UC Berkeley – CA Supreme Court Holds CEQA Does Not Cover Social Noise from Residential Projects, Clearing Way for UC Berkeley’s Housing Project at People’s Park.

Meyers Nave represented UC in preparation of an EIR for the construction of housing for approximately 3,000 students at two sites on the UC Santa Cruz main campus via a P3 delivery method, and successfully defended the Campus against five separate lawsuits challenging the EIR.

Advancing Sustainability with Green Energy Solutions. Meyers Nave supports LAWA’s Sustainability Action Plan through a range of real property services, including negotiating and preparing leases.

Meyers Nave played a key role as lead land use and CEQA counsel for the City of Anaheim’s visionary “Big A 2050” plan, a generational redevelopment centered on the Los Angeles Angels stadium.

Meyers Nave assisted the City of Rancho Cordova in the development and approval of plan amendments for the City’s largest land development project.

P3 to turn a 10-acre, city-owned parcel into a mixed-use community hub including housing as well as civic and commercial uses. Land use and environmental counsel for the City of Rancho Cordova on the Mills Crossing project, providing CEQA review and EIR guidance.

Civil rights challenge by a developer whose project was delayed due to need for environmental review. Also alleged various Section 1983 claims including equal protection violations.

Assisting the County of Los Angeles in the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Tapia Ranch Project, which entails the subdivision and development of 405 single-family residential units on approximately 1,167 acres of undeveloped hillside and canyon land in Los Angeles County.

Successfully tried and defended a CEQA challenge to a 70-unit residential development in Los Angeles, defending the project at trial against environmental claims.

Currently assisting the City of Brisbane in its review of a complex Specific Plan and development application for the Brisbane Baylands, an approximately 733-acre site located primarily in Brisbane following preparation of a Programmatic EIR (PEIR) for the large site.

Meyers Nave currently represents RUHS as CEQA and real estate counsel related to the future expansion of the RUHS Medical Center in Moreno Valley, a 30-year multi-phased program to guide the future expansion of the Medical Center.

Meyers Nave represented RUHS as outside real estate, land use and CEQA counsel on the Mead Valley Wellness Village Project, a $250 million behavioral health facility, covering the ground lease, the facilities lease and the development agreement with the public-private partnership partner, together with CEQA review and processing of the project.

Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Rashid, et al. – Jury Trial August 2006. Meyers Nave was lead counsel for the Sacramento Redevelopment Agency in several eminent domain actions to acquire parcels for redevelopment purposes.

Meyers Nave provides ongoing legal advice to the County of Los Angeles regarding the build-out of the Newhall Ranch Specific Plan in the northwestern unincorporated portion of Los Angeles County, focusing on in-depth legal review and negotiations of the Newhall Ranch Development Agreement terms and requirements.

Meyers Nave served the City of Anaheim as outside real estate litigation counsel related to proposed sale of the Angel Stadium property, successfully resolving complex contractual issues with the former purchaser in the transaction.

Drafted the City’s rent control, just-cause eviction, tenant protection and anti-harassment ordinances, balancing landlord and tenant interests against state and federal law.

Meyers Nave provided legal guidance to the County of San Bernardino on sober living facilities, including drafting zoning provisions and evaluating potential code enforcement actions against a variety of licensed and unlicensed facilities.

Advised a Northern California developer on LAFCO annexation issues and related zoning matters in connection with a large residential development.

Meyers Nave advises the City of Monterey on subdivision and vested-rights questions for a major mixed-use development on Cannery Row.

Malibu Canyon Continental Communities, L.P. v. County of Los Angeles. Meyers Nave successfully defended writ and inverse condemnation action over rejected development project in sensitive ecological area that serves as the gateway to Calabasas area in Santa Monica Mountains.

The case arose out of Glendale’s adoption in March 1993 of a comprehensive revision of its hillside ordinance, and its February 1993 denial of a developer’s request for a tentative map on a 29-acre ridgeline property.

Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles. Meyers Nave successfully defended writ and inverse condemnation action over rejected development project in sensitive ecological area that serves as the gateway to Calabasas area in Santa Monica Mountains.

The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”) statutory process enacted by the State Legislature is one of the critical tools needed to address the severe housing crisis facing California.

Represented a mezzanine lender defending against claims for breach of loan guaranties and an alleged loan-to-own scheme involving a $1.5 billion real estate portfolio, obtaining summary judgment and a favorable settlement.

We also advise on and protect individual UC development projects, including many that use creative funding models and P3s implemented under Meyers Nave’s guidance. For example, this includes the $1.2 billion UC Merced 2020 Project.

Obtained an $11 million verdict after a month-long jury trial for claims involving fraud and breach of fiduciary duty in connection with a $26 million real estate venture involving luxury homes in Southern California.

Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) v. AES Redondo Beach. Meyers Nave represented Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) in this breach of contract action where AES Redondo Beach breached its obligation under a negotiated Confirm to provide the District with a back up energy supply (RA) at a reduced price. This negotiated Confirm providing a below market price to 3CE was based on 3CE offering its written support to the State Water Board to allow the AES Redondo Beach operating plant to continue operation for several years. AES Redondo Beach is an environmentally unpopular project that has been subject to widespread community opposition from Surfriders and various other environmental groups. AES obtained the benefit of 3CE’s support and then reneged on providing the RA at the agreed to price. The damages for the replacement RA are in excess of 3 million dollars. This required knowledge of the extensive regulatory provisions within the energy market and Meyers Nave successfully negotiated a settlement for 3CE.

Case Citations: City of Huntington Beach, et al. v. Gavin Newsom, et al., No. 8:23-CV-00421-FWS-ADS. (U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Filed March 9, 2023) Also – United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Appeal Docket No.

Case Citations: *Orange County Council of Governments, A Joint Powers Agency vs Gustavo Velasquez, Interim Director of Department of Housing and Community Development, et al.*, No.

Two related disputes with a developer concerning SB 330 and litigation over the conditions of approval imposed on a large housing development, together with the successful defense of a constitutional challenge to the City’s COVID-19 emergency ordinance restricting residential evictions and actions to recover unpaid rent.

Defended a luxury condominium developer in a copyright infringement action in the Southern District of New York concerning designs in a San Francisco luxury condominium development.

Leonard Woods, etc. v. Alexandria Housing Partners, et al. Represented the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles (“CRA/LA“) in a federal court action filed by 10 individuals and several non-profit entities.

CP VI Admirals Cove, LLC v. City of Alameda (2025) 113 Cal.App.5th 116.