Podcast – Introducing the Greenwashing Mitigation Team
California’s Court of Appeal for the Third District recently held that El Dorado County’s imposition of a Traffic Impact Mitigation Fee (TIM) as a condition of approval for a residential building permit was valid under the...more
A traffic mitigation fee required for construction of a single-family home did not amount to an “unconstitutional condition” in violation of the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment, and the County complied with the...more
In a lengthy opinion tackling several of CEQA’s hot topics, a court of appeal has rejected the EIR for the Martis Valley West project, finding its Lake Tahoe water quality analysis, GHG and traffic mitigation measures, and...more
A school district may impose reasonable school impact fees based on the general type of development, regardless of whether the specific subtype of development will or will not generate new students. AMCAL Chico, LLC v. Chico...more
A Summary of Published Appellate Opinions Under the California Environmental Quality Act - The year 2019 saw several trailblazing opinions, indicating that courts continue to grapple with some of CEQA’s core policies. The...more
This blog examines the complexities of Agent of Change cases from our experience acting for developers and venues alike and, in particular, considers the concept and use of noise easements to resolve and manage noise issues...more
In Protect Telegraph Hill v. City and County of San Francisco (Sept. 14, 2017 Slip Opinion A148544, unpublished), the First District Court of Appeal upheld the City of San Francisco's determination that rehabilitation of a...more
Many developers must remove existing trees in order to build new homes or buildings. Some cities have required developers to pay fees, known as tree mitigation fees, as a condition for permitting the removal of the trees....more
Back on September 7, 2016, the Los Angeles City Council passed the new Parks Dedication and Fee Update Ordinance (“Quimby”) which will affect all new multi-family development projects in the City. The ordinance will take...more
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) published draft revisions on March 8, 2016 to its 1981 Mitigation Policy for mitigating the impacts of development projects to natural resources. See Proposed Revisions to the U.S....more
In an opinion filed September 10, and later ordered partially published on October 9, 2015, the Court of Appeal affirmed the substance of a judgment upholding an EIR for a regional shopping center renovation project in...more
In a decision that enhances the ability of local interests to obtain mitigation funds from state agencies, the California Supreme Court held that the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") requires the Board of...more
The California Environmental Quality Act has long been a key weapon in the ongoing war over development in California. In the last few years, the front line of the war has shifted to big-box retail projects. Originally...more
In a lengthy opinion filed February 28, 2014, and ordered partially published on April 1, 2014, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed the Yolo County Superior Court’s judgment denying a CEQA writ petition challenging...more