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 of Supervisors reversed staff’s decision, finding an EIR was required due to environmental impacts peculiar to the
Marie Cooper
City’s Interpretation of its Ordinance Regarding Coastal Development Permit Requirement for Attached ADU Was Not Entitled to Deference
The City of Malibu determined that an attached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) did not fall within the coastal development permit exemptions set forth in its local coastal program (LCP). The court overturned the City’s interpretation of its own LCP, finding the ADU exempt from the coastal permit requirement. Riddick v. City of Malibu, No.
The First Project Approval Establishes the Appropriate Statute Of Limitations for CEQA Challenges, Even When the CEQA Document Is Later Re-Adopted
A court of appeal held a CEQA challenge time-barred because it was not commenced within 30 days after a Notice of Determination (NOD) was filed for approval of a subdivision map based upon a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). The fact that the map and its vested rights were conditioned upon a later rezoning did not…
Housing Accountability Act Provision That Prohibits an Agency From Requiring a Rezoning When Zoning Is Inconsistent with the General Plan Inapplicable Where City Found Zoning Consistent.
A court rejected a developer’s attempt to take advantage of provisions in the Housing Accountability Act that prohibit a City from requiring a rezoning when zoning is inconsistent with the General Plan. It upheld Los Angeles’ determination that the existing zoning was consistent with the General Plan, even though the zoning was not expressly listed…
Court Invalidates Ordinance Reducing Floor Area Ratio on Residential Lots
The Housing Crisis Act of 2019, which enacted Government Code section 66300, generally precludes a city from reducing the intensity of land use on a parcel where housing is allowed below what was allowed on January 1, 2018. A court held that this provision prohibits reductions in the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) as well as…
Class 7 CEQA Exemption Requires Only a Showing of Protection of a Natural Resource, Not the Entire Environment, and a Potential For Environmental Impacts Does Not Prevent Use of a CEQA Exemption
A court upheld an ordinance that restricted development standards in designated overlay zones to protect wildlife corridors, finding that it did not establish a “use” that would be subject to certain requirements of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA). The court also upheld the County’s reliance on CEQA exemptions for the protection of a…
Fair Argument Standard Did Not Apply to Claim Regarding Exception to CEQA’s Historical Resources Categorical Exemption
This case addressed both application of CEQA’s categorical exemption for renovation of historical resources and application of an exception to the exemption that turned on the question whether the project complied with Secretary of Interior standards regarding renovation of historic structures. The court ruled that this issue is to be reviewed under the substantial evidence…
Coastal Commission Has De Novo Authority Over Issuance of Coastal Development Permits
The court upheld the authority of the California Coastal Commission to decide appeals of coastal development permits under a de novo standard of review. Cave Landing LLC v. California Coastal Commission, 94 Cal. App. 5th 654 (2023).
The McCarthys owned a parcel in the coastal zone of San Luis Obispo County that was subject…
County’s Claimed Failure to Comply with CEQA Was Not a Defense to Enforcement of Encroachment Laws
Property owners who acted illegally by blocking parking on a public street fronting their houses were not entitled to use the County’s alleged noncompliance with CEQA as a defense to actions enforcing encroachment laws. Anderson v. County of Santa Barbara, 94 Cal.App.5th 554 (2023).
Property owners in the Montecito area of Santa Barbara County…
Preliminary Injunctions in CEQA Cases Require an Evaluation of Harm to the Public Interest in Informed Decision-Making
Concluding that it was a “near certainty” that the Stratford Public Utility District (SPUD) failed to comply with CEQA when it granted an easement for a water pipeline, the appellate court vacated an order denying a preliminary injunction that would have halted construction and operation of the pipeline, and ordered the trial court to reconsider.