Two important, recurring CEQA questions are answered by a recent court of appeal decision in a case involving the EIR for a California State University campus master plan: whether CEQA requires funding of mitigation for a project’s effects on public services; and whether an adaptive mitigation program for traffic and parking impacts improperly defers decisions
Do Effects on the Adequacy of Public Services Have to be Mitigated Under CEQA?
No, at least according to a recent court of appeal decision in a case brought by the City of Hayward to challenge the EIR for the California State University East Bay campus master development plan.
The City of Hayward and two community groups claimed, among other things, that the university had violated CEQA because it
Supreme Court to Decide Scope of Categorical Exemptions from CEQA
In what is perhaps the most controversial CEQA decision this year, the court of appeal in Berkeley Hillside Preservation invalidated permits for construction of a single-family home, ruling that the project did not qualify under CEQA’s categorical exemption for construction of a single-family residence or its categorical exemption for infill development. The California Supreme Court
State University’s Duty to Mitigate Transportation Impacts to be Considered by Supreme Court
In City of San Diego v Board of Trustees of the California State University, the court of appeal overturned the EIR for the San Diego State University campus expansion plan, ruling that it did not adequately address transportation impacts and mitigation measures for those impacts. In a decision issued on December 13, the court
Appendix G of CEQA Guidelines Cannot Require Analysis of Effects of Environment on Project
Provisions of Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines that purport to require analysis of the effects of environmental hazards on a proposed project have been declared invalid by California’s Second District Court of Appeal. The court held that such impacts are not encompassed by CEQA, rejecting a claim that an Environmental Impact Report was required
Future Baseline May be Used for CEQA Review of Long-Term Infrastructure Project
In Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority, the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District ruled that in appropriate circumstances, projected future conditions may serve as an appropriate baseline for measuring a project’s impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act. The court disagreed with two controversial decisions from
Supreme Court Declines Review of CEQA Decision Upholding EIR’s Use of Existing Operations Baseline
In Citizens for East Shore Parks the court of appeal upheld use of existing “on the ground” conditions, including ongoing operations, as the baseline for CEQA review of long-term renewal of a State Lands Commission lease of property used for a marine terminal. On March 14, 2012 the California Supreme Court denied a petition for
California Supreme Court Applies “Common Sense” to Plastic Bag Ban
The California Supreme Court has held that simple common sense — “an important consideration at all levels of CEQA review” — indicated that the City of Manhattan Beach and its retail sector were too small for the City’s ban on plastic bags to cause any significant environmental impact or make any significant cumulative contribution to