McCombs v. Larson

California Court of Appeal Dec 10, 1959 No. Civ. 6201Published

Before: Monroe

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the petitioners were entitled to the issuance of building permits because, at the time of their application, no valid ordinance or statute authorized the building inspector to deny the permits based on a predecessor's failure to comply with lot-splitting ordinances.

Issues

Whether the building inspector had the authority to deny building permits based on noncompliance with lot-splitting ordinances at the time of application.
Whether the issuance of a building permit is a ministerial act when legal requirements have been met.

Disposition. reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It has been held that where the legal requirements for the issuance of a building permit have been complied with the issuance of the permit becomes a ministerial act and performance thereof may be required and compelled by the mandate of the court.”

“at the time the applications for permits were filed and were denied there was no express authority by ordinance or statute justifying a denial of the applications for failure to comply with ordinance 297.”

MONROE, J. pro tem.

The petitioners and appellants brought this proceeding for a writ of mandate to compel the respondent Marvin Larson, as building inspector of the city of Rialto, to issue building permits pursuant to their applica

[106]

tions filed on the 5th of March, 1957. The applications were denied on the same day. After hearing, the superior court denied the writ. By supplemental order it was provided that there be placed in escrow by petitioners a quitclaim deed dedicating a portion of the property in question to the city of Rialto for street purposes, and that they deposit bonds guaranteeing their compliance with the requirements of ordinances Numbers 295 and 297 .relative to splitting or dividing lots, said bonds to secure the construction of curbs and sidewalks.

The facts pertinent to the litigation have been established by stipulation of the parties. Ordinance Number 295 was amended by ordinance Number 297 of the city of Rialto, in 1954. It provides in substance that no lot or parcel of land within the city shall be split or divided without first obtaining the approval of the planning -commission. Provision is made for the filing of maps showing the proposed division and showing pertinent information relative to the improvements upon the property and the location and character of the existing public utilities and other like information. Provision is made for approval of the proposed splitting, providing that curbs and sidewalks are installed, the necessary sewer facilities taken care of, and that the lot sizes comply with the city ordinances. It is further provided “that such plan conforms to such policies as are or may be established by the planning commission.’’

The ordinances of the city relative to the issuance of building permits provide: “The application, plans, and specifications filed by an applicant for a permit shall be cheeked by the building official. Such plans may be reviewed by other departments of the city to cheek compliance with the laws and ordinances under their jurisdiction. If the building official is satisfied with the work described in an application for the permit and the plans filed therewith conform to the requirements of this code and other pertinent laws and ordinances, and that the fee specified . . . has been paid, he shall issue a permit therefor to the applicant. ’ ’

McCombs v. Larson

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief