Description: Challenge to Los Angeles County's determination that mitigation measures adopted by Newhall Ranch developer had reduced the greenhouse gas impacts of two "villages" within the project to less than significance.
-
Friends of the Santa Clara River v. County of Los Angeles
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 04/03/2020 Opinion Download Judgment for respondents-defendants affirmed. California Court of Appeal Said Recent Climate Change Information Did Not Necessitate Additional Consideration of Water Supply. The California Court of Appeal rejected the argument that Los Angeles County needed to prepare supplemental analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act of the impacts on water resources of the first two phases of the proposed Newhall Ranch development to take into account recent historic drought, record high temperatures, and “accumulating data” on climate change’s regional and global effects. The appellate court found that the County was “well aware of the threat posed by climate change” when it certified environmental impact report in 2011 and that post-2011 data were “consistent with the range of projections considered in 2011.” -
Friends of the Santa Clara River v. County of Los Angeles
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 12/19/2018 Decision Petition for writ of mandate denied. The California Superior Court rejected California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) claims challenging the sufficiency of mitigation measures adopted by the developers of the Newhall Ranch project in response to litigation in which the California Supreme Court found that the California Department of Fish and Wildlife had not supported its determination that greenhouse gas emissions from the project would be less than significant. The Superior Court found that substantial evidence supported the CEQA determination that the two villages of the Newhall Ranch development that were the subject of this litigation would generate zero net energy with implementation of the mitigation measures. The court also found that the 30-year timeframe and baseline used for evaluating the projects' greenhouse gas emissions was appropriate, that CEQA did not require mitigation to "less than significance." In addition, the court rejected the petitioners' contention that new information about climate change's impacts on water supply required preparation of a supplemental environmental impact report. 07/16/2018 Reply Download Reply brief filed by petitioners. 06/26/2018 Brief Download Joint opposition brief filed by respondents and real party in interest. 05/24/2018 Brief Download Opening brief filed by petitioners. 04/16/2018 Petition for Writ of Mandate Download First amended verified petition for writ of mandate filed.