Description: Challenge to environmental review and approvals for large development.
-
California Native Plant Society v. County of Los Angeles
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 05/11/2018 Opinion Download Opinion issued affirming writ issued by trial court. California Court of Appeal Said Approvals for Newhall Ranch Could Remain in Place While Los Angeles County Fixed Greenhouse Gas Analysis. The California Court of Appeal upheld a trial court’s decision to leave land use approvals of components of the Newhall Ranch development in Los Angeles County in place even though the court partially decertified the final EIR. The court partially decertified the EIR because Los Angeles County’s analysis of greenhouse gas emissions was found to be insufficient based on the California Supreme Court’s decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife, which concerned the same project and which found that the EIR’s conclusion that impacts of greenhouse gas emissions would not be significant was not supported by sufficient evidence or a reasoned explanation. The appellate court found that the limited writ granted by the trial court was a valid exercise of the trial court’s equitable powers. -
California Native Plant Society v. County of Los Angeles
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 09/22/2017 Settlement Agreement Download Settlement agreement reached. Newhall Ranch Developers Agreed to “Net Zero Plan” in Settlement with Project’s Opponents. The developers of the Newhall Ranch multi-use development project in northwestern Los Angeles County reached a settlement agreement on September 22, 2017 with groups that had opposed the project to end ongoing litigation and avoid future litigation over the projects. The California Supreme Court ruled in November 2015 that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife lacked substantial evidence to support its conclusion that greenhouse gas emissions associated with the project would not result in a cumulatively significant impact under the California Environmental Quality Act. The settlement agreement indicated that in response to the court’s decision, the developers committed to a “Net Zero Plan” that would, among other things, “result in more than approximately 10,000 solar installations producing approximately 250 million kWh of renewable electricity every year” and “installation of approximately 25,000 electric vehicle chargers within the development and across Los Angeles County, as well as approximately $14 million in subsidies toward the purchase of electric vehicles.” -
California Native Plant Society v. County of Los Angeles
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 12/01/2016 Opinion Download Opinion issued directing trial court to issue writ of mandate. In an unpublished decision addressing a greenhouse gas analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act that paralleled the analysis addressed by the California Supreme Court’s 2015 decision in Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife, the California Court of Appeal found, as the Supreme Court had found, that the finding that the project at issue would not have significant greenhouse gas impacts was not supported by substantial evidence and reasoned discussion. This decision came after the California Supreme Court transferred the petitioners' appeal back to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration in light of Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife. 09/29/2015 Opinion Download Opinion issued. California Court of Appeal Issued Third Decision Accepting Use of Business-as-Usual Emissions Baseline. The California Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s dismissal of claims in connection with environmental approvals for a section of Newhall Ranch known as Mission Village. As in Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife and Friends of the Santa Clara River v. County of Los Angeles, the court was not persuaded by claims that it was legally impermissible for the environmental review to compare the project’s emissions with emissions under a business-as-usual scenario. The petitioners indicated that they would ask the California Supreme Court to hear this case.