Montecito homeowners said Santa Barbara County couldn't enforce its encroachment law because the county had to go through a CEQA process. An appellate court said the homeowners who blocked parking spaces on their road were the lawbreakers, not the county.
In an unpublished ruling, appellate court uses "noisy Berkeley students" precedent to rule that human noise could be a significant impact under CEQA, thus killing infill exemption for project near USC.
Because 40 rent-stabilized apartments would be eliminated by construction of a new hotel, an appellate court ruled that the city cannot ignore the goals and policies in its own housing element.
An appellate court concluded that San Diego staff emails constituted a "smoking gun" that the city had not considered a proposed increase in the height limit in the Midway area's programmatic EIR.
One camp says CEQA litigation stifles housing production and reinforces the status quo. The other camps says CEQA litigation isn't all that frequent and leads to better projects. But what if they're both right?
At least that's what an appellate court ruled in a case from Pomona that was brought, ironically, by a prospective cannabis merchant who argued otherwise.
Dueling environmental groups disagreed over how much the university should thin non-native trees to reduce fire hazard. They both sued -- and they both lost.
