In an appeal from a judgment of the trial court granting a petition for a writ of mandamus on the ground that the discussion in an environmental impact report (EIR) concerning a proposed project’s water supply was inadequate and, as a result, violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) the trial court did not err in applying Public Resources Code section 21167.6 (e) and determining which documents to include and exclude from the administrative record; 2) the mitigation measure that proposes to verify that certain archaeological sites are historical resources for purposes of CEQA constitutes an unlawful deferral of environmental analysis; 3) the EIR’s traffic analysis lacks clarity regarding the baseline used to determine the project‘s potential impacts; 4) the discussion of cumulative impacts was legally inadequate because it failed to disclose and explain the basis for assuming a 30 percent build-out in the project area by 2025; 5) the trial court correctly determined that the analysis of the project’s proposed water supply was inadequate for purposes of CEQA; and 6) the trial court did not err in apportioning costs.
A Reputation For-Integrity And Excellence
A Reputation For-Integrity And Excellence
- Home
- »
- Environmental Law
- »
- Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v. County of Madera
Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v. County of Madera
On Behalf of Herrera Law & Associates, PLLC | Sep 13, 2020 | Environmental Law