Metropolitan Outdoor Advertising Corp. v. City of Santa Ana

[1403]

Opinion

SONENSHINE, J.

Metropolitan Outdoor Advertising Corporation appeals after the court denied its petition for peremptory writ of administrative mandamus. We affirm.

I

In 1981, Metropolitan received a “Conditional Use Permit” allowing it to erect a billboard in Santa Ana. When the permit expired, Metropolitan was “responsible for securing removal of the subject sign structure without expense to the City. [And it] agree[d] to City’s agents entry upon the subject property to remove the subject sign structure and to reimburse City in full for all costs of such removal . . . in the event [it] fail[ed] to do so.”

At the time of expiration, Metropolitan obtained the property owner’s consent to maintain the billboard, but the planning commission denied its request for a variance. Its appeal to the city council was also denied; this decision was confirmed during a subsequent meeting.

After a bench trial, Metropolitan’s petition for writ of mandate was denied. In support of its judgment, the court issued a detailed statement of decision.

II

Metropolitan incorrectly maintains it possesses a fundamental vested right in the continued use and maintenance of the billboard, mandating our independent review. Its reliance on

Goat Hill Tavern

v.

City of Costa Mesa

(1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1519 [8 Cal.Rptr.2d 385] is misplaced. In

Goat Hill,

a tavern owner, after receiving a six-month conditional use permit and a three-month extension allowing the addition of a beer garden to his establishment, invested $1.75 million in refurbishment and expansion. The city then denied his renewal application, effectively closing the business. The owner was granted a writ of administrative mandamus which was affirmed on appeal.