CP&DR

University Can't Ignore Off-Campus Growth Impacts

by Paul Shigley on Sep 1, 2006

California Environmental Quality Act, Monterey County, Vol. 21 No. 09 Sep 2006

The state Supreme Court has rejected California State University trustees' contention that the university does not have to mitigate off-site traffic and fire safety impacts from expansion of the CSU Monterey Bay campus. >>read more

Subdivision Approval Violated County General Plan, CEQA, Court Rules

Sep 1, 2005

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Orange County, Vol. 20 No. 09 Sep 2005

Orange County's approval of a controversial housing project in the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains has been overturned by the Fourth District Court of Appeal.

Sunrise Douglas Decision Published

Apr 1, 2005

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Vol. 20 No. 04 Apr 2005

The Third District Court of Appeal has published its decision in a case involving the environmental impact report for the 6,000-acre Sunrise Douglas community plan in the City of Rancho Cordova. In a rather harsh opinion, the Third District ruled against the Environmental Council of Sacramento and Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth. The court found that the project opponents failed to state the facts fairly and did not address the evidence in the record (see CP&DR Legal Digest, March 2005).

Segmentation, Lack of Review Sink L.A. Port Expansion Project

Dec 1, 2002

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Los Angeles County, Vol. 17 No. 12 Dec 2002

A state appellate court has halted a project at the Port of Los Angeles because the city never studied the development's environmental impacts. The court rejected the city's arguments that the project was covered by a 1997 environmental impact report and a 2000 subsequent EIR because the project had not been contemplated in 1997, and there was no evidence the 2000 study considered the project.

Unpermitted Activity Doesn't Alter Baseline for Review, Court Rules

Jun 1, 2002

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Sacramento County, Vol. 17 No. 06 Jun 2002

Sacramento County properly used 1997 conditions as the baseline for the environmental review of an airport project, even though the general aviation airport had been operating and growing without county permits since the early 1970s, the Third District Court of Appeal has ruled.

Project Opponent Loses Lawsuit for Failure to Correct Party

Jul 1, 2001

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Mendocino County, Vol. 16 No. 07 Jul 2001

The opponent of a proposed Mendocino County inn should have named the Coastal Commission in her lawsuit because the Commission, not the county Board of Supervisors, made the final decision on the project, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled.

Court Demands Better Analysis Of Project's Water Usage

Apr 1, 2001

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Monterey County, Vol. 16 No. 04 Apr 2001

Environmental review of a 109-unit subdivision on a 900-acre parcel in Carmel Valley was inadequate, the Sixth District Court of Appeal has ruled. The court concluded that in overturning the Monterey County Planning Commission's decision to deny the project, the Board of Supervisors used information about the project's water supply that had been introduced at the end of the environmental review process and had not been sufficiently analyzed or reviewed by the public.

EIR Can Postpone Detailed Study of Related Road Project

Feb 1, 2000

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, San Diego County, Vol. 15 No. 02 Feb 2000

An appellate court has ruled that an environmental impact report for a proposed San Diego County rock quarry was closer to acceptable than a trial judge had ruled, but the EIR still lacked a proper analysis of air quality impacts. The Fourth District Court of Appeal overturned San Diego Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell's ruling that the rock quarry EIR improperly deferred study of highway widening, and that the EIR failed to account for prior illegal mining on the property. Still, the unanimou...

Court Defines Environmental ‘Baseline': Conditions Allowed By CUP Serve As Starting Point

Apr 1, 1999

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Ventura County, Vol. 14 No. 04 Apr 1999

A county considering the environmental impact of a proposal to expand a mine may use full-capacity operation of the existing facility as the environmental "baseline" even if the facility is operating at less than full capacity, the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled.

Articles