Governor Gavin Newsom announced an ambitious and wide-ranging plan on May 19 to expedite the development of important infrastructure projects across the state, with the twin goals of building California’s clean energy future...more
Governor Gavin Newsom issued an executive order on April 22 suspending for a period of 60 days (1) the filing, posting, notice, and public access requirements related to certain notices under the California Environmental...more
Land Use and Development Case Summaries (short form) -
1. PLANNING AND ZONING -
CENTER FOR COMMUNITY ACTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE V. CITY OF MORENO VALLEY,
26 Cal. App. 5th 689 (2018) -
Based on the language and...more
1/29/2019
/ Anti-SLAPP ,
Appeals ,
Building Permits ,
Building Standards ,
CA Supreme Court ,
California Coastal Commission ,
CEQA ,
Clean Water Act ,
Coastal Real Estate ,
Density Bonus ,
Discharge of Pollutants ,
Endangered Species ,
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) ,
Exemptions ,
Fully Protected Species ,
General Plan ,
Homeowners ,
Housing Developers ,
Housing Market ,
Impact Fees ,
Land-Use Permits ,
Legislative Agendas ,
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) ,
Mitigated Negative Declaration ,
New Legislation ,
Property Owners ,
Real Estate Development ,
Referendums ,
Regulatory Takings ,
School Districts ,
State and Local Government ,
Subdivision Map Act ,
Sustainability ,
Traffic Impact Assessments ,
Urban Planning & Development ,
Waters of the United States ,
Wetlands ,
Zoning Laws
In Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College District (Supreme Court No. S214061, filed Sept. 19, 2016), the California Supreme Court resolved the vexing question of whether a change to...more
9/29/2016
/ Addendums ,
CA Supreme Court ,
CEQA ,
Colleges ,
Construction Industry ,
Construction Project ,
Educational Institutions ,
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) ,
Environmental Policies ,
Real Estate Development ,
Renovations
In 2015 the California appellate courts continued to chart new ground as they grappled with some of CEQA’s most difficult and controversial questions. The Supreme Court of California led the way, issuing four opinions on...more
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW -
The published court decisions in 2012 reflected a heightened recognition that CEQA does not require perfection, but rather a reasonable effort to provide environmental information that...more
According to the author’s April 23, 2013 press release, the amended version of Senate Bill 731 is a “comprehensive reform” of CEQA, “modernizing the law to aid California’s economic growth.” But a close review shows that the...more
In an opinion published on March 28, 2013, a California court of appeal answered three questions under the California Environmental Quality Act that the published decisions have not yet addressed...more
The first published California Environmental Quality Act case of 2013, Save Cuyama Valley v. County of Santa Barbara, strongly endorsed a lead agency’s authority to use its own, project-specific significance thresholds in an...more
In This Issue:
- Project Approvals Triggering CEQA
..Chung v City of Monterey Park (2012) 210 CA4th 394
..Tuolumne Jobs and Small Business Alliance v Superior Court) 210 CA4th 1006 (petition for review pending,...more
1/3/2013
/ Ballot Measures ,
CEQA ,
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) ,
Exemptions ,
Greenhouse Gas Emissions ,
Groundwater ,
Permits ,
Standing ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Tolling ,
Wal-Mart