What is the process required to upzone a lot (about 6500 sq ft) from R1.5 to R3 in LA County? Is this the type of situation that a land use attorney would take on contingency i,e, they would only get compensated if their efforts were successful?
The process is involved and highly discretionary. You would definitely need an attorney or an experienced land use consultant to handle this kind of thing. I would be very surprised if they took it on a contingency, especially for such a small property. You might see if you can negotiate a reduced fee and a bonus if you prevail. Before you spend too much time and money on it though you might want to suss out the Supervisor in your district to see if they might be supportive (you said the County so I am assuming unincorporated LA). It would be a good idea to have a paid representative with you even at that, so that it is presented in the most favorable light at the get go.
As one of the other commentators stated, you might be better off trying for a zone variance if, for example, your property is surrounded by denser uses and you are not able to build what your neighbors have already built.
We have very little information here but generally speaking it would be very unusual for it to be appropriate to rezone such a small parcel.
What are my options if I want to avoid a lengthy entitlement process and avoid dealing with community boards and neighborhood councils and CEQA. Any relatively fast and simple strategies to get the 1.5 parcel bumped to r3? or any other viable str...
I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the answer to this question is, probably not. You can't just tie the RD1.5 lot to the neighboring lot and get extra density, though there may be ways you can move the density around or perhaps provide some of the parking for the denser-zoned parcel on the RD1.5 zoned parcel. But you would definitely need to retain a land use attorney or a well qualified land use consultant to help you with this. I strongly advise against attempting to save money by trying to avoid hiring someone with the requisite expertise when you are trying something complex like this. In any case, depending on what you are trying to accomplish, you may need to go through the entitlement process anyway.See question
Is there any benefit to using a land use attorney as opposed to a land use consultant when working on rezoning a land parcel in Los Angeles? Is an attorney actually needed for this process?
I would say it depends on a few things. First, there is a broad range of competency with consultants. There are some that are quite good and can handle very complex matters. Others not so much. If there are environmental issues--for example of it would potentially require an EIR or if there are contamination issues, you want an attorney. Likewise, if there are due process issues, you will need an attorney--though generally due process issues arise after you have failed to win at the administrative level, and you can bring an attorney in at that point if necessary. Sometimes community groups think that if you have a lawyer involved, the developer is trying to game the system or has deep pockets, so that is a potential downside in that regard. So another factor is how well equipped the law firm is to handle community outreach. That is why I set up my practice as a consultancy, and you can hire me either as a consultant or as an attorney, depending on the nature of the matter. Generally speaking, rezoning is a major matter and you don't want to scrimp on that part of the process as it may cost you exponentially more if the person you retain isn't up to the job. Hope that helps.See question
The one property has a 1000 sq.ft. triangular piece that it doesn't use, but makes the other property's path of travel to its garage easier.
I agree with the others but just wanted to add something in case what you are actually talking about would be moving the lot line. I had a matter just like that in the Hollywood Hills --lot line didn't match reality and there was a retaining wall and some drainage that were separated from the property owner that actually needed them, so they ended up doing a lot line adjustment. It ended up impacting the required setbacks and so forth so it was rather intricate to figure out a way to resolve it without having to go in for a planning approval. Either way, I concur that you should retain an attorney. This is definitely one of those cases where if you don't do it properly, it can end up costing you exponentially more than your legal fees.See question
property owners from the RSO? If I want to convert an existing property from office spaces to residential units does a Q condition allow me to do this and not come under the RSO? Can I have residents living in the units before a Certificate of Occ...
I agree with the above comment. In addition, you should be able to find the Q condition by looking up your property on zimas - http://zimas.lacity.org/. Under the "case number" section there will be at least one ordinance -- if you click on one of those links you should be able to see what the specific limitations are.
However, in terms of the RSO, the Q condition would have no bearing on that but new residential units are generally not subject to rent control in the City of LA.
The slopes running behind the houses on my street, all owned by the lot owners, all vary with the amount of "slope" that is left for the HOA to maintain. If there are no dimensions stated on the recorded CC&R's, only a vague "slope maintenance" e...
I'm not totally clear on the issue, but as I understand it, you should be able to use the portion of the easement area that is on your property, as long as you don't use it in any way that undercuts the purpose of the easement, i.e., slope maintenance. So landscaping it in a way that is consistent with that should be fine; building a structure or modifying the slope in a way that is not consistent with it would conflict with the purpose of the easement. I also agree with the other two comments.See question
Sally owns a single family residence (SFR) in the city of Los Angeles (zone R2) with 2 bedrooms and a Certificate of Occupancy dated 1960. In 2001 she decides to make an "addition" which she intends to rent out as 2 studios to make $. She gets a...
Are you asking on behalf of the landlord or tenant, or a prospective purchaser? I would want to pull up the address on the City planning departmnent's website to answer and advise. It might be a quick answer -- you can email me with the address and your contact information and I can look into it on Monday or Tuesday and call you.See question
I'm buying a condo and I am now in the due diligence period (10 days). The current owner added a couple walls, a closet, and a platform to the condo. I do not believe the modifications were completed with permits. I also believe that the platform ...
I agree with the comments above. I would definitely be concerned about the modifications fromn both a CC&R and City perspective. An additional concern is that, if these improvements were done without permits, you don't know whether they were done in a way that is structurally sound. It depends on the nature of the improvements, of course. I would definitely seek a credit or other concessions from the seller.See question
APN number. On vacant lot, we started construction of a home, which is now 90% complete. On the deed, it shows lot 1 and lot 2, if property forecloses, what happens then? Will the sell individually or all as one package?
I'm concerned as to how you separated the lots. Did you process a parcel map with the city or county in which you are located? If you didn't properly subdivide the lots (and just having separate APNs doesn't cut it), then the bank would still have the right to foreclose on all of it. Whatever the bank lent against, it would have rights to.See question
Our neighbor pushed back the slope on their west side of front yard and installed a 9 foot retaining wall leaving about a foot of their property line next to ours. Leaving us to maintain it since 1998 when we all first moved into the development....
If this is really just about the removal of ground cover, it's a very heavy handed approach. If it's just ground cover and it's on their property, why don't they just remove it themselves? It would be a lot less expensive then hiring an attorney to sue you. In fact, if the amount of damages is less than $7500, then they are in small claims court and must represent themselves (unless they want injunctive relief but you said damages). So I sense that there is more to this story. In terms of you gaining ownership of it, in California, you can't get adverse possession over another's property unless you've been paying the property taxes on it. There are various other possibilities, but I concur with the prior person who answered this -- boundary line issues are complex and there is a lot of law on the subject. I'm also not clear on what you want. It sounds like it would be better for you if they maintained their own property, and it sounds like they now want to do that. If what you really want is a prescriptive easement over this part of the property, then it's a different story.See question