Abbott & Kindermann, LLP’s Mid-Year CEQA Update reviews the seven cases issued to date.
Continue Reading 2011 CEQA MID-YEAR UPDATE
June 2011
Two Instructive District Court Opinions on RCRA (90-Day) and CWA (60-Day) Pre-Lawsuit Notices: One “Boilerplate” Notice Was Insufficient; the Other Was Specific Enough
Two Federal District Court opinions in California examined the sufficiency of pre-lawsuit notices that must be given to responsible parties and relevant agencies before citizen suits are filed either under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), 33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq. (“60-Day Notice”), and/or under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), 42 U.S.C. § 6901, et seq. (“90-Day Notice”).
Continue Reading Two Instructive District Court Opinions on RCRA (90-Day) and CWA (60-Day) Pre-Lawsuit Notices: One “Boilerplate” Notice Was Insufficient; the Other Was Specific Enough
Building Code Compliance Mitigation for Seismic Impacts Upheld
Posted in CEQA
A thorough analysis of building codes and local ordinances applicable to seismic hazards provides the substantial evidence necessary to uphold the City of Oakland’s revised EIR.
Continue Reading Building Code Compliance Mitigation for Seismic Impacts Upheld
Legal Challenges to Land Use Decisions Governed By Strict Statutes Of Limitation, Including Those Based Upon Non Compliance with the Housing Element Requirements
Posted in Local Government, Planning, Zoning, & Development
Legal challenges for non compliance with state affordable housing laws governed by relatively short statute of limitations periods.
Continue Reading Legal Challenges to Land Use Decisions Governed By Strict Statutes Of Limitation, Including Those Based Upon Non Compliance with the Housing Element Requirements
That’s the Way the Buildings Crumble: City’s Purchase and Demolition of Adjacent Buildings is Not a Taking
This case involved a city program to have property owners with property near the airport apply to voluntarily sell their properties to the city. After acquiring the properties, the city demolished all buildings and left the land vacant to mitigate for incompatible residential dwellings near the airport. Certain property owners that chose not to sell their properties sued the city on the grounds that its actions amounted to a taking. The appellate court disagreed, finding that the program was voluntary and the property owners could not be compensated for the decrease in the property value.
Continue Reading That’s the Way the Buildings Crumble: City’s Purchase and Demolition of Adjacent Buildings is Not a Taking
No Discharge, No Cumulative Impact
Posted in CEQA
In Santa Monica Baykeeper v. City of Malibu (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1538, Santa Monica Baykeeper (“Baykeeper”) challenged the City of Malibu’s adoption of an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) and approval of the Legacy Park project. Legacy Park is a clean water project located in Malibu, near Surfrider Beach.
Continue Reading No Discharge, No Cumulative Impact
A Very Detailed Agreement In The Process Of Negotiating A Development Project May Not Constitute An Approval For CEQA Environmental Review Purposes
Posted in CEQA
In Cedar Fair, L.P. v. City of Santa Clara (2011) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, 2011 Cal.App.LEXIS 506, the court found that a city and its redevelopment agency’s entering into a “term sheet” for the development of a professional football stadium development project was not an “approval” that required environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, even though the term sheet was very detailed and substantial sums had been spent on consultants leading up to that agreement.
Continue Reading A Very Detailed Agreement In The Process Of Negotiating A Development Project May Not Constitute An Approval For CEQA Environmental Review Purposes