• Skip to main content
  • Home
  • Contact
  • About
  • Search
    • Search US
    • Search Global
  • Global Litigation
  • U.S. Litigation

IBC Business Owners for Sensible Development v. City of Irvine

Filing Date: 2020
Case Categories:
  • State Law Claims
    • State Impact Assessment Laws
Principal Laws:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Description: Challenge to the City of Irvine’s approval of a plan to redevelop a 4.95-acre parcel in the Irvine Business Complex with an office complex.
  • IBC Business Owners for Sensible Development v. City of Irvine
    Docket number(s): G060850
    Court/Admin Entity: Cal. Ct. App.
    Case Documents:
    Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary
    02/06/2023 Opinion Download Judgment granting petitioner’s request for writ of mandate affirmed. California Appellate Court Voided Approval of Office Complex Project, Said Determinations on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Were Incorrect. The California Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court decision that granted a petition for writ of mandate challenging the City of Irvine’s approval of a plan to redevelop a 4.95-acre parcel in the Irvine Business Complex with an office complex. The court found that there was insufficient evidence showing that the project’s greenhouse gas emissions were within the scope of the program environmental impact report prepared for the IBC development plan in 2010. The court further found that the project’s greenhouse gas emissions had not been shown to be less than significant. The court also rejected a contention that the project was subject to an exemption from environmental review for in-fill development. The court found that no exemption applied because the project involved “unusual circumstances which may cause significant environmental effects”—namely, greenhouse gas emissions exceeding significance thresholds.

© 2023 · Sabin Center for Climate Change Law · U.S. Litigation Chart made in collaboration with Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP

The materials on this website are intended to provide a general summary of the law and do not constitute legal advice. You should consult with counsel to determine applicable legal requirements in a specific fact situation.