Building Industry Association of San Diego v. City of Oceanside

California’s State Planning and Zoning Law (planning law) governed local zoning ordinances. One section of the planning law required that a zoning ordinance must be consistent with a city’s general plan, or comprehensive plan. Other sections of the planning law prohibited cities from discriminating against residential developments for low- and moderate-income persons (i.e., affordable housing), promoted the creation of affordable housing, and provided for density bonuses or other incentives for housing developments with a certain percentage of affordable housing. Pursuant to the planning law, the City of Oceanside (the city) (defendant) adopted a general plan that included a stated policy of avoiding direct controls on the number of new housing units built. The policy indicated that the provision of housing for persons of all income levels was an issue of the highest priority. However, in 1987, the city adopted the Residential Development Control System (Proposition A). Essentially, Proposition A imposed a maximum on the number of dwelling units to be constructed each year with certain exceptions. The Building Industry Association of San Diego (building association) (plaintiff) brought an action, seeking declaratory relief to invalidate Proposition A because it conflicted with the city’s general plan and the planning law’s statewide policy to promote affordable housing. The trial court found in favor of the city and upheld Proposition A. The building association appealed.