Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Within an ordinance is a list of land use designations commonly known as zoning. Each different type of zone has its own set of allowed uses. These are known as by-right uses. Then there is an extra set of uses known as special uses. To build a use that is listed as a special use, a special-use permit (or conditional-use permit) must be obtained.
The California Driver Handbook is a booklet published by the California Department of Motor Vehicles. It is also available on the web. [15] Formerly titled the 'Vehicle Code Summary', it has information relating to licenses, examinations, laws/rules of the road, road signs, seat belts, and health and safety issues.
The California Vehicle Code, informally referred to as the Veh. Code or the CVC , is a legal code which contains almost all statutes relating to the operation, ownership and registration of vehicles (including bicycles [ 1 ] and even animals when riding on a public roadway [ 2 ] ) in the state of California in the United States .
Dec. 8—In Monday's commission study session, one agenda item focused on proposing an ordinance to amend Section 9-3 and Table 9-1 of the city's zoning regulations to remove the option of a ...
A use variance is a variance that authorizes a land use not normally permitted by the zoning ordinance. [2] Such a variance has much in common with a special-use permit (sometimes known as a conditional use permit). Some municipalities do not offer this process, opting to handle such situations under special use permits instead.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday granted California its request to enforce vehicle emissions standards stricter than federal rules, including the state's ban on sales of new ...
A federal judge approved a request for preliminary injunction of a new state concealed weapons law that would add restrictions on where guns can be carried and some other hurdles to getting a permit.
The "polestar" of regulatory takings jurisprudence is Penn Central Transp. Co. v.New York City (1973). [3] In Penn Central, the Court denied a takings claim brought by the owner of Grand Central Terminal following refusal of the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission to approve plans for construction of 50-story office building over Grand Central Terminal.