Transportation Archives - Thomas Law Group

Oct

11

2021

In Separate Opinions, Third District Court of Appeal Reverses Trial Court’s Holding, Rejects Olympic Valley Development Project EIR Based on Insufficient Baseline, Traffic, and Noise Impact Analyses; Finds that After-Hours Dispersal of Updated Project Materials Violated the Brown Act

In Sierra Watch v. Placer County (2021) ____ Cal.App. _____, and Sierra Watch v. Placer County (2021) ____ Cal.App. _____, the Third District Court of Appeal considered two appeals from separate trial court decisions concerning a resort project in Olympic...

Sep

30

2021

Johannah Kramer

Second District Court of Appeal Rejects Parking Impact and Alternatives Challenges to Angeles National Forest Renovation Project EIR

In Save Our Access v. Watershed Conservation Authority (2021) 68 Cal.App.5th 8, the Second District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s grant of a petition for writ of mandate related to a national forest redevelopment project’s parking impacts but...

Dec

30

2019

Johannah Kramer

Citizens for Positive Growth & Preservation v. City of Sacramento (2019) 2019 Cal. App. LEXIS 1274

In 2009, the City of Sacramento (City) adopted its 2030 General Plan. In October 2012, the City initiated its five-year technical update to the 2030 General Plan (hereafter referred to as “2035 General Plan” or “Plan”). The City released the...

Nov

21

2019

Johannah Kramer

Union of Medical Marijuana Patients, Inc. v. City of San Diego (2019) 7 Cal. 5th 1171

Union of Medical Marijuana Patients, Inc. v. City of San Diego (2019) 7 Cal. 5th 1171 In 2014, the City of San Diego adopted an ordinance amending its zoning code to allow for medical marijuana dispensaries. The ordinance capped the number...

Jan

3

2019

Thomas Law Group

Third District Holds City’s Explanation and Substantial Evidence Supported Traffic Impact Conclusion, Discharge of Writ of Mandate Proper

In reviewing whether the City of Sacramento complied with a peremptory writ of mandate issued by the Sacramento Superior Court (East Sacramento Partnership for a Livable City v. City of Sacramento (2016) 5Cal.App.5th 281 (ESPLC I)), the Third District Court...

Jul

16

2018

Thomas Law Group

Fact-Based Residents’ Comments Substantial Evidence Meriting CEQA Review, Special Commission’s Findings Substantial Evidence Meriting CEQA Review

In Protect Niles v. City of Fremont (2018) 25 Cal.App.5th 1129, the First District Court of Appeal held that the Niles Historical Architectural Review Board’s (HARB) factual findings and members’ collective opinions about the compatibility of a project with the...

Feb

28

2018

Johannah Kramer

Second District Court of Appeal Finds Secondary Parking Impacts Exempt from CEQA Review, Encourages Project Area Contextualization

In Covina Residents for Responsible Development v. City of Covina, (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 712, the Second District Court of Appeal held that parking impacts caused by a project are exempt from CEQA review, per Public Resources Code section 21099. Additionally,...

Nov

2

2015

Chris Butcher

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT REJECTS CHALLENGE TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

In an unpublished decision, Save Desert Rose v. City of Encinitas, 2015 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7685, the Fourth Appellate District reversed the judgment of the trial court and held Save Desert Rose (Petitioner) failed to demonstrate that substantial evidence...

Oct

28

2015

Chris Butcher

NEW GUIDANCE ON BASELINES WHEN PROJECT IS REUSING OR REPLACING AN EXISTING BUILDING

On October 9, 2015, the Court of Appeal partially published the Fourth Appellate District’s opinion in North County Advocates v. City of Carlsbad (2015) 2015 Cal.App.LEXIS 891 (North County). The published portion of the opinion discusses an important exception to...

Aug

11

2015

Thomas Law Group

Supreme Court Rejects the California State University System’s Erroneous Interpretation of City of Marina v. Board of Trustees of California State University (2006) 39 Cal.4th 341 Regarding its Duty to Mitigate Off-Campus Impacts

After months of anticipation, the Supreme Court issued its ruling on City of San Diego v. Trustees of the California State University, S199557, affirming the appellate court’s ruling that the California State University (CSU) should have evaluated one or more...

Jul

7

2015

Chris Butcher

Supplement to 16 year old EIR is Acceptable, Project Proponents Need Not Address Every Comment Following Public Review.

In City of Irvine v. County of Orange, (July 6, 2015, G049527)__Cal.App.4th__, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the adequacy of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) prepared approximately 16 years after the original EIR was adopted. The court...

Mar

5

2015

Chris Butcher

Double Dribble: Court Rejects Second CEQA Lawsuit Over the Downtown Sacramento Arena

In Saltonstall v. City of Sacramento, 2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 150, the California Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s denial of a writ of mandate challenging the environmental impact report (EIR) for an arena in downtown Sacramento...

Transportation

Oct

11

2021

Sep

30

2021

Dec

30

2019

Nov

21

2019

Jan

3

2019

Jul

16

2018

Feb

28

2018

Nov

2

2015

Oct

28

2015

Aug

11

2015

Jul

7

2015

Mar

5

2015

Browse by Categories

Newsletter Signup