Opinion
Page 135f
140 Cal.App.4th 135f __ Cal.Rptr.3d __ THOMAS MAHON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. COUNTY OF SAN MATEO et al., Defendants and Respondents. A110171 California Court of Appeal, First District, Fifth Division June 19, 2006THE COURT:
It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on May 18, 2006 (139 Cal.App.4th 812; __ Cal.Rptr.3d __), be modified as follows:
1. On page 2 [139 Cal.App.4th 815, advance report, par. 3, line 5], in the second sentence of the second full paragraph, the citation to section 53096, subdivision (a) is deleted so the sentence now reads:
"State law, as well as County policy and practice at the time, required such notice. (See §§ 65091, subd. (a)(3), 65905, subd. (b).)"
2. On page 13 [139 Cal.App.4th 815, advance report, par 1, line 4], in the first sentence of the first full paragraph, the word "affect" is changed to "effect" so the sentence reads:
"The applicant's burden in giving such notice is minimal, in light of the considerable benefit he obtains in having a permit approved within just 60 days—perhaps before the county's planning department has completed its review or resolved public concerns—notwithstanding the significant effect his project may have on the community."