Search for: "Arthur F. Coon" Results 221 - 240 of 453
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Jul 2015, 1:35 pm by Arthur F. Coon
In a 47-page published decision filed June 17, 2015, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s judgment denying a writ petition, and held that Respondent Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (“Agency”) must comply with CEQA before “refining” its Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (“MSHCP”) to exclude a 200-acre parcel of ranch land owned by Anheuser-Busch, LLC (“Busch”) from its protections against… [read post]
5 May 2015, 5:03 pm by Arthur F. Coon
I recall that Mike Zischke, co-author of CEB’s excellent CEQA treatise, used to be fond of saying the “normal” or “usual rules” for analyzing cumulative impacts should apply to analysis of a project’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under CEQA. [read post]
28 Aug 2020, 12:25 pm by Arthur F. Coon
(providing that “[i]f possible, a well should be located outside areas of flooding”; and 9 (requiring a well’s “annular space” be “effectively sealed” and establishing minimum subface seal depths). [read post]
18 Aug 2016, 8:22 am by Arthur F. Coon
Resources Code, §§ 21159.21(f), 21159.22(b)(3), 21159.23(a)(2)(A), 21159.24(a)(1), (3), 21155.1(a)(4)(B)) also constitute “exceptions to the general rule that CEQA [does] not require an evaluation of existing hazards on future users of a proposed project. [read post]
21 Sep 2021, 1:44 pm by Arthur F. Coon
On September 13, 2011, I began the endeavor of writing Miller Starr Regalia’s CEQA Developments blog. [read post]
1 Feb 2023, 8:44 am by Arielle Harris
The 2021-2022 Legislative Session was light on CEQA amendments, and once again did not produce any significant reform. [read post]
6 Jun 2013, 11:46 am by Arthur F. Coon
In a lengthy published opinion filed May 21, 2013, the First District Court of Appeal reversed a judgment granting a writ of mandate and upheld as legally adequate under CEQA the Marin Municipal Water District’s EIR for development and construction of a desalination plant in Marin County. [read post]
19 Dec 2016, 8:36 am by Arthur F. Coon
In an opinion filed December 7, and later ordered published on December 16, 2016, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed a judgment denying a writ petition on the “single legal issue” whether plaintiffs were entitled under Public Resources Code § 21151(c) (and a municipal code section with essentially the same content) to an appeal of a planning commission’s “substantial conformance review” (SCR) determination to the city council. [read post]