The City of Santa Clara (City) approved a long and detailed “term sheet” for the development of a professional football stadium. The Petitioner challenged the approvals claiming the “term sheet” constituted approval of a project as defined by CEQA. The trial court found for the City, holding that no EIR was required because approval of
Santa Monica Baykeeper v. City of Malibu (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1538
Petitioner challenged the City of Malibu’s (City) approval of the Legacy Park project, a water treatment plant designed to reduce pollution and protect water quality at nearby beaches. After an unsuccessful appeal to the City Council, and denial of a writ at trial, the Petitioner appealed to the Second District Court of Appeal arguing that…
Banning Ranch Conservancy v. Superior Court (2011) 193 Cal. App. 4th 903
Petitioner retained the law firm Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger (Shute) to challenge the City of Newport Beach’s (City) plan to a build a highway on its land. The City responded with a motion to disqualify the law firm, arguing that it was a current client of Shute thus creating a conflict of interest. The trial…
Landvalue 77, LLC v. Board of Trustees (2011) 193 Cal. App. 4th 675
In a case involving a mixed-use development project on a university campus, the Fifth District Court of Appeal held the trial court acted in error by failing to issue a writ following the entry of judgment. If a trial court finds that a decision of a public agency has been made without complying with CEQA,…
Wilson & Wilson v. City Council of Redwood City (2011) 191 Cal. App. 4th 1559
The plaintiff challenged the City’s approval and construction of a retail-cinema redevelopment project in the City’s downtown. While the lawsuit was pending before the Superior Court the plaintiff did not seek a temporary injunction or stay and, as a result, the project was fully constructed before the Superior Court issued its ruling in favor of…
Voices of the Wetlands v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (2011) 52 Cal. 4th 499
Duke Energy (now Dynergy) applied to renew its NPDES permit for its Moss Landing Power Plant (MLPP). The Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) issued a revised NPDES permit, determining that the MLPP cooling water intake system represented the “best technology available” (BTA), as required under the Clean Water Act. Voices of…
Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach (2011) 52 Cal. 4th 155
An association of plastic bag manufacturers challenged the city’s negative declaration, claiming the city’s ordinance prohibiting the distribution of plastic bags would have significant environmental impacts resulting from an increased use of paper bags, and thus alleged an environmental impact report (EIR) was required. The California Supreme Court issued a decision addressing two issues. First,…
Contents of an Administrative Record: Who is in “Control”?
Preparation of the administrative record for CEQA litigation is governed by Public Resources Code section 21167.6, subdivision (e). In Consolidated Irrigation District v. The Superior Court of Fresno County, (2012) ___ Cal.App.4th_____, the court provided important guidance regarding the proper contents of the record and sets some limitations on an agency’s responsibility to respond…
Substantial Evidence Test Applies to Subsequent Environmental Review After a Negative Declaration Has Been Adopted for a Project
In Abatti v. Imperial Irrigation District (2012) 2012 Cal.App. LEXIS 496, the court considered whether the substantial evidence, rather than the “fair argument,” test applies to determine whether further environmental review is warranted for a subsequent approval where the agency has initially adopted a negative declaration for the project.
In 2006, the irrigation district adopted…
Court Defers to Local Agency Characterization of Lot Line Adjustments as Ministerial Actions Not Subject to CEQA
In Sierra Club v. Napa County Board of Supervisors (2012) 2012 Cal.App. LEXIS 454, the Sierra Club challenged a lot line adjustment ordinance adopted by Napa County, which allowed lot line adjustments under the Subdivision Map Act on parcels that had previously been adjusted, as long as the prior lot line adjustment has been completed…