Search for: "Arthur F. Coon"
Results 381 - 400
of 465
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 May 2024, 4:54 pm
In an opinion filed April 18, and belatedly ordered published on May 15, 2024, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order discharging the peremptory writ of mandate that was issued following the Court of Appeal’s earlier direction in Save Our Capitol! [read post]
29 Jul 2019, 4:47 pm
In an opinion originally filed June 28, and later certified for partial publication on July 22, 2019 (upon the request of the California Building Industry Association), the Second District Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment denying a CEQA writ petition challenging a project converting a vacant former apartment building into a boutique hotel in Los Angeles’ Hollywood area. [read post]
3 May 2021, 9:58 am
In an 85-page opinion filed March 25, and modified and certified for partial publication on April 23, 2021, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Napa County Superior Court’s judgment denying a writ petition challenging the County’s EIR and approvals for an expansion of Syar Industries, Inc. [read post]
3 Apr 2018, 4:20 pm
SB 743 was enacted in 2013 to further California’s efforts to reduce GHG emissions by encouraging transit-oriented, infill development – a strategy announced in SB 375, the “Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008. [read post]
22 May 2023, 10:58 am
In an opinion filed April 18, and belatedly ordered published on May 10, 2023, the Sixth District Court of Appeal upheld the City of San Jose’s (City) certification of a final Supplemental EIR (FSEIR) for development of three high-rise office towers (the “Project”) on an eight-acre downtown site containing several historic structures which the Project required to be demolished. [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 11:39 am
In a published opinion filed September 28, 2017, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Alameda County Superior Court’s judgment denying appellant Living Rivers Council’s (LRC) writ petition challenging the State Water Resources Control Board’s (the “SWRCB” or “Board”) approval of a policy designed to maintain instream flows in coastal streams north of San Francisco. [read post]
8 Oct 2013, 11:59 am
The important legislative policy of expediting CEQA litigation sometimes inevitably conflicts with the policy favoring resolution of cases on their merits. [read post]
12 Aug 2024, 10:42 am
The Sixth District Court of Appeal filed on July 24, and later certified for publication on August 6, 2024, its opinion in Center for Biological Diversity et al. v. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 9:24 am
“You may say I’m a dreamer. [read post]
20 Aug 2018, 11:14 am
It also credited fact-based public commentary and observations as showing potentially significant traffic impacts, and observed that the Initial Study itself confirmed a Project-caused change in traffic LOS from E to F, which adverse impact was not rendered insignificant under CEQA or “trumped” by City’s adopted threshold of significance to that effect. [read post]
12 May 2015, 12:51 pm
The Court of Appeal’s Application Of The “Fair Argument” Test The Court of Appeal observed that CEQA provides no “ironclad definition” of what constitutes a significant effect and that “[i]f there is disagreement among expert opinion supported by facts …. the Lead Agency shall treat the effect as significant and shall prepare an EIR” (citing 14 Cal. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 2:40 pm
The Court noted it “has no obligation to perfect an inadequate record” and that “the general rule is that “[f]ailure to provide an adequate record concerning an issue challenged on appeal requires that the issue be resolved against the appellant. [read post]
2 May 2023, 11:45 am
Dept. of Commerce (9th Cir. 2017) 878 F.3d 725, had been held too speculative to analyze. [read post]
27 Sep 2024, 12:28 pm
Resources Code, § 21080(c)(1); CEQA Guidelines, § 15064(f)(3).) [read post]
18 Nov 2024, 10:43 am
(f).) [read post]
23 Aug 2021, 8:52 am
In a published opinion filed August 19, 2021, the Second District Court of Appeal reversed a judgment of the Los Angeles County Superior Court that found fault with the EIR for an improvement project within the San Gabriel Mountains National Monument portion of the Angeles National Forest. [read post]
31 Oct 2022, 12:32 pm
In a published opinion filed October 26, 2022, the Second District Court of Appeal (Div. 6) appears to have significantly expanded the reach of both the Brown Act and the procedural requirements of CEQA in holding, on an issue of first impression, that a public agency must list its staff’s determination that a project is exempt from CEQA as an item of business on the agenda for the meeting at which it considers the project approval. [read post]
28 Oct 2019, 1:12 pm
However, “[i]f the project may have significant effects, but mitigation measures will make the effects insignificant, the agency may adopt a mitigated negative declaration. [read post]
3 Mar 2015, 11:19 am
Tracing the early legislative and judicial history of CEQA, the Court observed that its landmark Friends of Mammoth decision construing CEQA to apply to approvals of private projects noted that CEQA “deals…with questions of degree” and that “[f]urther legislative or administra [read post]
31 Mar 2017, 3:37 pm
In a unanimous 29-page opinion authored by Associate Justice Carol Corrigan, and filed on March 30, 2017, the California Supreme Court held the City of Newport Beach’s EIR for a large mixed-use development project proposed on a 400-acre coastal zone site failed to comply with CEQA. [read post]
