Navigating Environmental Restrictions on Alternative Project Delivery for Complex Infrastructure Projects
On-Demand Webinar | Charting a Course for Offshore Wind Energy in California
[WEBINAR] Update on the California Environmental Quality Act: What’s New for 2018
[WEBINAR] Building a Solar Energy Project in 2018
How Trump's Infrastructure Plan Impacts the Energy Industry
BB&K's Charity Schiller Discusses CEQA Baseline
On November 22, 2024, the First District Court of Appeal’s (Div. 4) partially-published opinion in People of the State of California ex rel. Bonta v. County of Lake (Lotusland Investment Holdings, Inc., et al. Real Parties in...more
In People ex rel. Bonta v. County of Lake (2024) 105 Cal.App.5th 1222, the First District Court of Appeal held that the Final EIR (“FEIR”) and associated errata for a proposed mixed-use development project, located in a rural...more
In a partially published opinion filed October 31, 2024, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 1) held, in light of AB 1307 and the Supreme Court’s decision in Make UC a Good Neighbor v. Regents of University of...more
In Save Our Capitol! v. Dept. of Gen Servs. (2024) 105 Cal.App.5th 828—the third appeal challenging renovations and additions to the State Capitol (Project) under CEQA—the Third District Court of Appeal rejected petitioner’s...more
The Third District Court of Appeal held that it was proper to award respondents costs for the preparation of CEQA administrative record documents as the prevailing party, even though petitioners had elected to prepare the...more
“It’s like déjà vu all over again.” Yogi Berra - In a (mostly) published opinion filed October 24, 2024, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 2) affirmed the trial court’s judgment denying a writ petition in a CEQA...more
Welcome to “CEQA News You Can Use,” a quarterly production of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP’s Natural Resources lawyers. This publication provides quick, useful bites of CEQA news, which we hope can be a resource to...more
In a published opinion filed October 21, 2024, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 7) reversed a judgment entered after the trial court granted without leave a real party developer’s motion for judgment on the...more
In a terse opinion filed September 13, and modified and ordered partially published on October 3, 2024, the Third District Court of Appeal upheld an award of reasonable record preparation cots to prevailing lead agency County...more
In an opinion filed on July 24, and later ordered published on August 19, 2024, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 4) affirmed the trial court’s judgment denying a writ petition challenging actions taken by the Los...more
Welcome to “CEQA News You Can Use,” a quarterly production of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP’s Natural Resources lawyers. This publication provides quick, useful bites of CEQA news, which we hope can be a resource to...more
City of Los Angeles - Increase to Planning Applications and Affordable Housing Linkage Fees - On July 1, 2024, the fee for planning and land use applications increased by 3.5% based on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban...more
The California Supreme Court, on June 6, 2024, reversed the First District Court of Appeal’s decision regarding UC Berkeley’s Long Range Development Plan (LRDP) EIR. The Supreme Court’s unanimous decision clears the way for...more
The California Supreme Court held that under newly enacted Assembly Bill 1307, the environmental impact report prepared for UC Berkeley housing and longer-term development was not inadequate for failing to consider social...more
California Senate Bill No. 174 (SB 174), a budget trailer bill that was passed by the Assembly with amendments on June 26, received Senate concurrence on the amendments the same day, and was enrolled and presented to the...more
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has long required a full analysis of project's potential adverse effects on the environment. The environmental impact report (EIR)-known as the "heart of CEQA"-is intended to...more
The County of San Diego planning staff found a project qualified for a CEQA exemption under Guideline 15183, which applies to projects consistent with a general plan for which an EIR had been prepared. On appeal, the Board...more
In an important published opinion filed February 16, 2024, the Fourth District Court of Appeal (Div. 1) held the San Diego County Board of Supervisors committed a prejudicial abuse of discretion in granting project opponents’...more
In a published opinion filed on January 17, 2024, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 5) reversed a trial court judgment overturning a mitigated negative declaration (MND) and requiring an EIR for a 42-single family...more
2023 served up roughly the same number of published appellate CEQA cases as 2022 with a defense win percentage of over 80 percent, which has been the case in many, if not all, of the past ten years. A prominent theme of...more
In Tsakopoulos Investments v. County of Sacramento (2023) 95 Cal. App. 5th 280, the Third District Court of Appeal (“Court”) upheld the County of Sacramento’s (“County”) certification of the Mather South Community Master Plan...more
In a partially published opinion filed September 20, 2023, the First District Court of Appeal (Div. 3) affirmed the Alameda County Superior Court’s judgments denying writ petitions in three partially consolidated CEQA actions...more
In a partially published opinion filed on September 7, 2023, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment denying a CEQA challenge to Sacramento County’s approval of a mixed-use development project known as the...more