CEQA

The Direction of CEQA “Reform” Under Proposed SB 731: One Step Up and Three Steps Back?

by Arthur F. Coon | Miller Starr Regalia on 5/20/2013

There has been a lot of buzz around proposed SB 731, which is working its way through the State Legislature and will be heard Monday, May 20, in the Senate Appropriations Committee. Notwithstanding the hype and hopes, I think...more

Public Agency May Begin Eminent Domain Proceedings Before Completing CEQA Review, But May Not Actually Acquire The Property Until...

by William T. Chisum, Jon E. Goetz, Jeffrey L. Massey, Leslie Z. Walker | Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedemann & Girard on 5/13/2013

A racetrack landowner challenged a regional park district’s plan to condemn part of the property for construction of a bayside trail, asserting that the park district was required under eminent domain law and the California...more

Towards Not Reinventing The CEQA Wheel: Resources Agency Adopts New CEQA Guidelines For Streamlined Review of Urban Infill...

by Arthur F. Coon, Matthew Henderson | Miller Starr Regalia on 5/9/2013

Repetitive CEQA review and analysis is expensive, unnecessary, unproductive, and inimical to the goals of certainty and finality in the environmental review process. In 2011, to address these concerns in the infill...more

CPUC Seeks to Revisit Controversial Decision on CEQA Process for Telecommunications Projects - Public Agency Participation is...

by Gail A. Karish, Charity B. Schiller | Best Best & Krieger LLP on 5/7/2013

After a pause of more than a year, the CPUC has revived its effort to determine whether and how it will conduct environmental review of certain telecommunications projects under the California Environmental Quality Act...more

Missing CEQA Statute of Limitations Is Not Excusable Neglect, Third District Holds

by Arthur F. Coon | Miller Starr Regalia on 5/2/2013

In its terse, no-nonsense opinion in Alliance For the Protection of the Auburn Community v. County of Placer, et al. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 25, ordered published onApril 2, 2013, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a...more

Site Assembly

by Hopkins & Carley on 5/2/2013

The “good old days” of formal redevelopment are over. Real estate developers no longer can negotiate to assemble development sites under the threat of condemnation. Silicon Valley developers now face serious challenges in...more

Update on CEQA Reform: Steinberg’s Quest for the “Elusive Middle Ground”

by Shaye Diveley, Miles H. Imwalle | Morrison & Foerster LLP on 5/1/2013

The last year witnessed what once appeared to be a groundswell of support for the “modernization” of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), loosely meaning easing the burden of the process itself and minimizing...more

CEQA Reform: The Cure May Be Worse Than The Disease

by Marc Bruner, Julie Jones, Barbara Schussman | Perkins Coie on 4/30/2013

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

Q&A With Morrison & Foerster's Chris Carr

by Morrison & Foerster LLP on 4/29/2013

Chris Carr is co-chairman of the Morrison & Foerster LLP's cleantech group and chairman of the firm's environment and energy group. Carr has focused his practice on permitting and litigation under the federal Endangered...more

California Environmental Law and Policy Update - April 25, 2013

by David D. Cooke, Emily L. Murray, Sandi L. Nichols | Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis... on 4/26/2013

Environmental and Policy Focus - ..Bills to create CEQA courts hinge on funding question: California lawmakers are considering legislation that would assign specialized judges to hear California Environmental...more

First District Holds CEQA Remedies Provision Allows Park District’s Eminent Domain Action To Proceed Pending Preparation of...

by Arthur F. Coon | Miller Starr Regalia on 4/25/2013

In Golden Gate Land Holdings LLC v. East Bay Regional Park District (4/12/13 1st Dist., Div. 5) _____ Cal.App.4th _____, 2013 WL 1491547, the First District Court of Appeal explored the scope and proper application of CEQA’s...more

No Relief Under CCP Section 473 For Missed Filing Deadline In CEQA Challenge

by Daniel Bane | Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on 4/23/2013

Alliance for the Protection of the Auburn Community Environment, et al. v. County of Placer, SCV0028200 (3rd Dist., February 18, 2013). In Alliance for the Protection of the Auburn Community Environment v. County of...more

Condemn Now, CEQA-Compliance Later? OK. Maybe....

by Brad Kuhn | Nossaman LLP on 4/19/2013

Acquiring property for public projects typically does not occur until after the project has received environmental approval. While this is the generally accepted rule – and it makes sense for a number of reasons – must a...more

California Environmental Law and Policy Update - April 11, 2013

by David D. Cooke, Emily L. Murray, Sandi L. Nichols | Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis... on 4/16/2013

Environmental and Policy Focus - ..Court rules CEQA streamlining provision unconstitutional: CourtHouse News - Apr 3 - A section of a California law aimed at streamlining construction projects by moving...more

Business News Digest – April 2013

by Michael Baader, Jamie Barnett, Andrew Bigart, Amanda C. Blunt, Edward Boyle, Gregory Braker, Robert Burton, Emilio W. Cividanes, John F. Cooney, Krista Coons, Ashley Craig, Daniel Danello, more +Robert P. Davis, Paul Debolt, Douglas Emhoff, Lisa Jose Fales, Matthew R. Farley, Kathryn Floyd, Thomas Gilbertsen, Nancy Grunberg, Michael Hartmere, J. Scott Hommer, Stuart P. Ingis, Jay Johnson, Jonathan King, Mitchell Kolkin, George Kostolampros, Dismas Locaria, Elizabeth Lowe, Melissa McLaughlin, Lindsay B. Meyer, Parker B. Morrill, Jonathan L. Pompan, Hillary Profita, Matthew R. Rabinowitz, Megan Roberts-Satinsky, Anthony Rosso, Martin Saad, Sejal Shah, Raymond Shepherd, Eric R. Smith, Robert Smith, Margaret Strand, Joeann Walker, Ariel S. Wolf, Jason Wool, Brian Zimmet | Venable LLP on 4/15/2013

In this issue: - Finders May Pose Risk in Private Capital Raising - NIST Holds First Workshop on Executive Order Cybersecurity Framework - NIST Issues Request for Information, Begins Developing...more

Residential Project Exempt From CEQA Review Under Government Code Section 65457 As Consistent With Specific Plan For Which Program...

by Arthur F. Coon | Miller Starr Regalia on 4/11/2013

In a recently published opinion construing Government Code § 65457’s exemption from environmental review for a residential development consistent with a specific plan for which an EIR was previously certified, the First...more

Late Filing Of Appeal Of Environmental Impact Report And Project Approval Is Not Excused Under Code Of Civil Procedure Section 473

by Jeffrey L. Massey, Leslie Z. Walker | Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedemann & Girard on 4/11/2013

An organization sought to challenge a county’s project approval and certification of an Environmental Impact Report for a 155,000-square-foot building, but filed the case three days late. The trial court dismissed the case. ...more

AB 900 CEQA Reform Law Partially Struck Down

by Arthur F. Coon | Miller Starr Regalia on 4/9/2013

Ruling from the bench at a March 29, 2013 hearing, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch found a key provision of an ambitious CEQA reform law championed by Senator Darrell Steinberg to be unconstitutional....more

Certain Residential Developments Exempt from CEQA Review: Greenhouse Gas Emission Issues Do Not Constitute New Information

by William R. Devine | Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis... on 4/9/2013

The recent California appellate court decision in Concerned Dublin Citizens v. City of Dublin, Cal: Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate Dist., 3rd Div. 2013, upheld a City's affirmation that residential developments are exempt...more

Court Upholds CEQA Exemption for Residential Development - Minor Project Tweaks and New Greenhouse Gas Thresholds Don’t Trigger...

by Sarah E. Owsowitz, Charity B. Schiller | Best Best & Krieger LLP on 4/4/2013

In a recent case involving the California Environmental Quality Act, a state appellate court upheld a city’s decision to exempt from environmental review a residential development because it was consistent with a broader...more

Home

Legal News

Find a Lawyer

Browse Subjects

Subscribe

Pro Services

For Reporters