In Los Angeles Dept. of Water & Power v. County of Inyo (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 1018, the Fifth District considered a challenge to a decision by Inyo County (County) to acquire landfill sites owned by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) through eminent domain. In the published portion of the opinion, the Court upheld the writ issued by the trial court and held that (1) the County’s failure to give notice of its intent to use a CEQA exemption excused the LADWP from exhausting administrative remedies as to exemption claims, and (2) the existing facilities categorical exemption did not apply to the operations of the unlined landfills.
Exemptions
Sacramentans for Fair Planning v. City of Sacramento (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 698, 704.
Sacramentans for Fair Planning v. City of Sacramento (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 698, 704.
The Yamanee project, a 10-story mixed-use condominium development in Midtown Sacramento, (Project) exceeded both the density and height limits of its parcel’s zone. A Sacramento General Plan provision allows the City Council to authorize projects at densities higher than the applicable zoning…
Categorical Exemption Applies to Single Family Residence Project on Demolished Historical Resource Site
In Bottini v. City of San Diego (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 281, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that the City of San Diego (City) violated CEQA where it refused to rely on a categorical exemption and instead required that an EIR be prepared for a single family residence project (Project) on a vacant lot.…
Second District Court of Appeal Finds County Well Permit Approval is “Ministerial,” Exempt from CEQA Review Absent Showing of Discretion, SGMA Absent Agency Law Incorporation
In California Water Impact Network v. County of San Luis Obispo (2018) 25 Cal. App. 5th 666, the Second District Court of Appeal held that the approval of groundwater well permits was a ministerial act and not subject to CEQA environmental review because no discretion was exercised when such permits were issued.
County of San…
Second Appellate District Upholds PG&E Lease Extension as Categorically Exempt from CEQA, Finds Unusual Circumstance Exception Inapplicable to Extension of Nuclear Power Plant Lease
In World Business Academy v. California State Lands Commission (2018) 24 Cal.App.5th 476, the Second Appellate District determined that renewing a lease for an existing power plant constituted a categorically exempt “existing structure” project under CEQA and the record did not support an “unusual circumstances” exception to the exemption.
Diablo Canyon Power Plant is a…
Fourth District Court of Appeal Finds Minor Telecommunications Facility on Dedicated Park Land Is Not An “Unusual Circumstance” Exception to CEQA Small Facility Exemption
In Don’t Cell Our Parks v. City of San Diego (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 338, the Fourth District Court of Appeal found that the San Diego City Charter (Charter 55) did not prohibit the City of San Diego (City) from approving a telecommunications project within real property held in perpetuity by the City for “park purposes.”…
First District Court of Appeal Strikes Down Challenge to Categorically Exempt Project, Rejects Argument that Conditions of Approval Signal Significant Impacts
In Protect Telegraph Hill v. City and County of San Francisco (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 261, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court and upheld the City and County of San Francisco’s (“City”) approval of the construction of a three-story-over-basement, three-unit condominium and the restoration of an existing cottage on a 7,517-square-foot lot…
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT UPHOLDS CITY’S RELIANCE ON CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS, PAVING THE WAY FOR PROPOSED ASPHALT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
BoDean Company, Inc. (“BoDean”) operates an asphalt plant in the City of Santa Rosa. The plant is a vested and legal nonconforming use that has been in continuous operation since approximately 1953. In November 2011, BoDean proposed to install three new storage silos, ancillary conveyors, three batchers, and an air filtration system. The upgrade would…
IN CENTRAL VALLEY SHOWDOWN OVER ANNEXATION, THE CITY OF KINGSBURG REIGNS (MOSTLY) SUPREME
In 2012, the City of Kingsburg began the process of annexing approximately 430 acres of land in Fresno County, including developed land that was home to three major facilities: a glass manufacturing plant, a grape processing facility, and a raisin processing plant. The land proposed for annexation separates the City of Kingsburg from the City…
Fourth Appellate District Modifies Published Opinion on the Unusual Circumstances Exception to Categorical Exemptions
Note: the Supreme Court granted a request for depublication of this opinion on August 22, 2016. See here.
On June 17, 2016, the Fourth Appellate District modified its recently published opinion, People for Proper Planning v. City of Palm Springs. As modified, the opinion now cites to last year’s Supreme Court decision Berkeley…