In Georgetown Preservation Society v. County of El Dorado (2018) 2018 Cal.App.LEXIS 1167, the Third District Court of Appeal held that conformity with the general plan does not insulate a project from CEQA review. Where a“large number” of public comments objected to the project for “nontechnical” aesthetic issues, there was a fair argument that the
negative declaration
First Appellate District Denies Initial Study Noise Level Challenge to Transitional Housing Project Based on Non-Expert Analysis
By Thomas Law Group on
In Jensen v. City of Santa Rosa (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 877, the First Appellate District held that noise impacts from a proposed youth center and transitional housing project were properly analyzed and approved with a negative declaration (ND) where the City of Santa Rosa’s (City) acoustic expert found no noise impacts above the baseline would…
Substantial Evidence Test Applies to Subsequent Environmental Review After a Negative Declaration Has Been Adopted for a Project
By Thomas Law Group on
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 Rejects Use of an MND for a Residential Development Relying on Groundwater Holding that Existing Groundwater Overdraft Establishes the Project will Potentially Result in a Cumulatively Considerable Groundwater Impact
By Thomas Law Group on
Posted in Negative Declaration
In an unpublished decision, the Consolidated Irrigation District filed a petition for writ of mandate challenging the City of Selma’s use of a mitigated negative declaration in approving a 160-unit, 44-acre residential development (Consolidated Irrig. Dist. v. City of Selma, Fifth Appellate District Case No. F061103 (Feb. 8, 2012 – unpublished)). The trial…
Mitigation Fee Programs Must Be Analyzed In An EIR Prior to Adoption
By Thomas Law Group on
Center for Sierra Nevada Conservation et al. v. County of El Dorado (January 20, 2012) 202 Cal. App.4th 1156 (Superior Court Case No. PC20080336)
El Dorado County adopted an oak woodland management plan (Management Plan) and mitigation fee program (Fee Program) without first certifying an EIR. Instead, the County issued a negative declaration that…