California Land Use & Development Law Report
California Land Use & Development Law Report
California Land Use & Development Law Report offers insights into legal issues relating to development and use of land and federal, state and local permitting and approval processes.
Agricultural Conservation Easements Partially Mitigate the Loss of Agricultural Land
Completion of Project Did Not Moot CEQA Claims, and County’s Failure to Exercise Jurisdiction Could Provide a Basis for a CEQA Claim
Court Overturns County’s Decision to Require an EIR For Lack of Substantial Evidence
The First Project Approval Establishes the Appropriate Statute Of Limitations for CEQA Challenges, Even When the CEQA Document Is Later Re-Adopted
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
Court Upholds EIR for UCSF Parnassus Expansion Against Wide-Ranging CEQA Claims
Monterey Water Saga Continues: County’s Approval of Desalination Plant Upheld Against CEQA Challenges
Court Approves EIR’s Climate Change Analysis for Community Master Plan
Trial Court Cannot Retain Jurisdiction if Terms of Peremptory Writ of Mandate are Fully Satisfied
School Districts’ Challenge to EIR Based on Inadequate School-Facilities Funding was Speculative
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).
EIR for Relicensing of Oroville Dam Adequately Evaluated Environmental Impacts
An environmental impact report need not discuss impacts that are too speculative in nature for proper evaluation or assess economic costs not linked to a physical change in the environment. County of Butte v. Dept. of Water Resources, 90 Cal.App.5th 147 (2023).
Compensatory Mitigation Infeasible for Loss of Historic Building
The Court of Appeal upheld the City's determination that compensatory mitigation for the loss of a historic building in the form of funding of other historic preservation was not feasible because there were no other buildings in the downtown areas with the same architectural style, period of significance, and purpose. Preservation Action Council of San Jose v.
CEQA In-Fill Exemption Inapplicable Where Project Conflicted with General Plan Affordable Housing Policies
The appellate court invalidated the City's reliance on CEQA's Class 32 in-fill exemption to approve construction of a hotel because the project included demolition of affordable housing and thereby conflicted with General Plan policies favoring preservation of such housing. United Neighborhoods for Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles, 93 Cal.App.5th 1074 (2023).
San Diego’s Removal of Building Height Limit Improperly Relied Upon Earlier Program EIR for Community Plan
In Save Our Access v. City of San Diego, 92 Cal. App.