§Why CasetextPricing

SIERRA CLUB v. COUNTY OF FRESNO (FRIANT RANCH)

Amicus Curiae Brief of Center for Biological Diversity

16 Cited authorities

  1. Cit. for Resp. Growth v. City

    40 Cal.4th 412 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 402 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Concluding “we determine de novo whether the agency has employed the correct procedures” in a case where appellant sought writ under both sections

  2. Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California

    47 Cal.3d 376 (Cal. 1988)   Cited 620 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an EIR must include an analysis of the environmental effects of future expansion if it is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the initial project and the future expansion will be significant in that it will likely change the scope or nature of the initial project or its environmental effects

  3. Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Comm. v. Cty of Los Angeles

    11 Cal.3d 506 (Cal. 1974)   Cited 469 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Construing requirements of Gov. Code, § 65906 for zoning variances

  4. E.P.I. Center v. C.F.F.P

    44 Cal.4th 459 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 137 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding no prejudice for omission of documents which were duplicative of information already contained in the EIR

  5. Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority

    57 Cal.4th 439 (Cal. 2013)   Cited 108 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[w]hile an agency has the discretion under some circumstances to omit environmental analysis of impacts on existing conditions and instead use only a baseline of projected future conditions, existing conditions ‘will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a lead agency determines whether an impact is significant’ ”

  6. Association, Irritated v. Madera Co.

    107 Cal.App.4th 1383 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003)   Cited 127 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding an EIR's biological impact conclusion because record established agency's expert reviewed relevant databases, “then conducted a field study, after which she analyzed her findings and prepared a written report”

  7. Sierra Club v. State Bd. of Forestry (Pacific Lumber Co.)

    7 Cal.4th 1215 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 151 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Noting that "the [California Board of Forestry] has the ultimate power of approval over a [THP]"

  8. Perez v. Roe 1

    146 Cal.App.4th 171 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 53 times
    Holding that the law could not constitutionally revive claims that had lapsed under prior limitations periods

  9. East Peninsula Ed. Counc. v. Palos Verdes Pennin

    210 Cal.App.3d 155 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989)   Cited 49 times
    Holding that school district failed to proceed in manner required by law

  10. Rural Landowners Assn. v. City Council

    143 Cal.App.3d 1013 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 55 times
    Finding prejudicial a city's conduct that prevented state agencies from submitting timely comments on a CEQA project; although the city received similar comments from others, "it was impossible ... to know what effect these expert criticisms would have had on public comments, presentations and official reaction"

  11. Section 15151 - Standards for Adequacy of an EIR

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15151   Cited 23 times

    An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decisionmakers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement

  12. Section 15126.4 - Consideration and Discussion of Mitigation Measures Proposed to Minimize Significant Effects

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15126.4   Cited 21 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Discussing measures that can achieve preservation in place

  13. Section 15126.2 - Consideration and Discussion of Significant Environmental Impacts

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14 § 15126.2   Cited 6 times

    (a) The Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project. An EIR shall identify and focus on the significant effects of the proposed project on the environment. In assessing the impact of a proposed project on the environment, the lead agency should normally limit its examination to changes in the existing physical conditions in the affected area as they exist at the time the notice of preparation is published, or where no notice of preparation is published, at the time environmental analysis