Local Agencies May Deny Proposed Mobilehome Park Subdivisions Inconsistent with The Open Space Element of Their General Plan

In Carson Harbor Village Ltd. v. City of Carson, published July 31, 2015, the Second District Court of Appeal, Division 8, concluded -- contrary to the court's earlier decision in the same case -- that the Subdivision Map Act requires a municipality to deny permission for a proposed mobilehome park conversion from rental to tenant ownership if the conversion is inconsistent with elements of the municipality's general plan; and that the portion of the Act governing hearings on mobilehome park conversions -- Government Code section 66427.5 -- does not bar denial on that ground.  A series of earlier lower appellate court decisions had interpreted section 66427.5 to bar rejection of proposed conversions based on considerations other than whether the procedure set forth by section 66427.5 had been followed.  In Pacific Palisades Bowl Mobile Estates, LLC v. City of Los Angeles (2012) 55 Cal.4th 783, the California Supreme Court held that section 66427.5 did not prevent municipalities from also applying other statutes that control subdivision approval when considering whether to approve conversions.  The court deemed this authority a change in the law that created an exception to the law-of-the-case doctrine.  Based on the reasoning in Pacific Palisades, the court determined that the portions of the Subdivision Map Act that required the subdivision to comply with the municipality's general plan apply to mobilehome conversions.  The court also determined, 2-3, that substantial evidence supported the city's conclusion that this conversion would conflict with the open-space element of the city's general plan.