|
- CEQA -
The California Environmental Quality Act's exemption for "limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures" is clearly not limited to a single small structure. The exemption applies to the installation of small new equipment on numerous existing small structures in scattered locations. Information about the possibility that a second cell provider might seek to install microcell transmitters if another cell provider received the permission for the installation of transmitters was not sufficient to support a finding that the environment in the project area would suffer significant cumulative impacts. An area's zoning for residential agricultural use is not a designation that the area is "an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern."
Aptos Residents Association v. County of Santa Cruz (Crown Castle) - filed Feb, 5, 2018, publication ordered Feb. 27, 2018, Sixth District
Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 988
Full text click here >
- Clean Water Act -
Pipes, ditches, and channels that discharge pollutants from non-concentrated aquatic animal production facilities are "point sources" under the Clean Water Act for which a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit must be obtained.
Olympic Forest Coalition v. Coast Seafoods Company - filed March 9, 2018
Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 16-35957
Full text click here >
- Conditional Use -
Substantial evidence supported a county's denial of an application for a conditional use permit to house tigers on a property in a residential area. It is reasonable to conclude that tigers do not belong in a residential area and there is more than ample evidence to support a finding that such animals pose a danger to the public.
Hauser v. Ventura County Board of Supervisors - filed Feb. 20, 2018, Second District, Div. Six
Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 822
Full text click here >
- Eminent Domain -
Code of Civil Procedure Sec. 1260.040 applies only to eminent domain proceedings, not inverse condemnation actions.
Weiss v. People ex rel. Department of Transportation - filed March 1, 2018, Fourth District, Div. Three
Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 1041
Full text click here >
- National Forest Mgmt Act -
The U.S. Forest Service was not required to reevaluate its approval for a proposed vegetation management project to consider a thesis prepared by a graduate student on lynx reproductive success given the Forest Service's determination that the relationship between vegetation composition and lynx reproduction are not well enough understood to direct specific changes in vegetation management. A forest plan's "goals" are not just a wish list that imposes no obligations, however the Gallatin National Forest Plan allows flexibility in the manner and timing of the achievement of its stated goals; a vegetation management project complied with the Gallatin National Forest Plan's obligation to ensure species viability and monitor population trends for two management indicator species; the Forest Service also took a "hard look" at the project, and did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in approving it.
Native Ecosystems Council v. Marten - filed Feb. 22, 2018
Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 16-35571
Full text click here >
- Public Law 99-625 -
Various fishing industry groups had standing to challenge a decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to terminate an experimental sea otter translocation program based on the harms they suffer because of sea otter predation of shellfish. The Fish and Wildlife Service acted lawfully in terminating the translocation program because the decision was based on a reasonable interpretation of Public Law 99-625. Since Public Law 99-625 gave the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service discretion to implement an experimental program, the agency could reasonably interpret the statute to allow it to terminate that program if the statute's purpose was no longer being served.
California Sea Urchin Commission v. Bean - filed March 1, 2018
Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 15-56672
Full text click here >
- Water Resources -
Regulations adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board setting forth a fee formula for permit and license holders impose fees that are proportionate to the benefits derived by the permit and license holders. The board's decision to allocate all of the United States Bureau of Reclamation's annual fee for projects within a project to the water supply contractors was reasonable because the contractors received everything the USBR had to give.
Northern California Water Association v. State Water Resources Control Board - filed March 2, 2018, Third District
Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 1055
Full text click here >
- Yellowstone River Compact -
The State of Wyoming violated the Yellowstone River Compact by reducing the volume of water available in the Tongue River at its border between Montana in 2004 and in 2006.
Montana v. Wyoming - filed Feb. 20, 2018
Cite as 2018 S.O.S. 137orig_new_2cp3
Full text click here >
|