Your authoritative, multi-channel network for natural resources and environmental information since 1989 – by practioners for practitioners.

California Land Use Law & Policy Reporter

October 2011

Volume 21, Number 1 October 2011


Senate Bill 226 Would Streamline and Exempt Certain Projects from



U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Proposes Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for Southwestern Willow Flycatcher5

As Alaska Appeals a District Court’s Upholding of the Listing of the Polar Bear as Threatened the FWS Prepares a Recovery Plan for the Species6

EPA Announces Energy Star Eligibility for New Multi-Family High Rise Buildings7

Draft EIS/EIR For Salton Sea Species Conservation Habitat Project Issued by U. S. Army Corps and the California Natural Resources Agency8


Southern California Water Agencies Sue U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service over Expansion of Santa Ana Sucker Habitat11

California Coastal Protection Network Files Suit against San Francisco, Challenging Unpermitted Beach Revetments12


District Court of Appeal:

Sixth District Upholds City’s ‘Spot Zoning’ Based on Finding that Density Restriction Is Reasonably Related to Public Welfare15

Arcadia Development Co. v. City of Morgan Hill et al., 197 Cal.App.4th 1526 (6th Dist. 2011).

After Addressing the Cultural and Water Supply Analyses, the Third District Finds This to Be a Case Where ‘CEQA Worked’16

Clover Valley Foundation et al. v. City of Rocklin, 197 Cal.App. 4th 200 (3d Dist. 2011).

Fourth District Determines Reversal of Lower Court Decision Is Appropriate where Case Becomes Moot During Pendency of Appeal18

Coalition for a Sustainable Future in Yucaipa v. City of Yucaipa, et al., ___Cal.App.4th___, Case No. E047624 (4th Dist. Aug 25, 2011).

Sixth District Overturns Denial of Attorney’s Fees and Determination that Petitioner Is Disqualified from Receiving Fees Based on Personal Stake in the Litigation20

Edna Valley Watch v. County of San Luis Obispo, ___Cal.App.4th___, Case No. B223653 (6th Dist. Aug. 2, 2011).

Fourth District Rejects Inverse Condemnation Claim Against County for Property Damages Related to Flood Events21

Gutierrez v. County of San Bernardino, ___Cal.App. 4th___, Case No. E050452 (4th Dist. Aug. 24, 2011).

Fifth District Upholds Scope of Administrative Record but Finds County Failed to Comply With CEQA Analysis of Traffic and Water Supply23

Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v. County of Madera (Tesoro Viejo, Inc.), ___Cal.App.4th___, Case No. F059153 (5th Dist. Sept. 13, 2011).

Second District Upholds City’s Finding that Climate Change Mitigation Is Infeasible and Project’s Benefits Outweigh Its Harms26

Santa Clarita Organization for Planning the Environment v. City of Santa Clarita, ___Cal.App.4th___, Case No. B224242 (2nd Dist., published July 26, 2011).

First District Upholds Mitigated Negative Declaration and Challenge to Agency’s Notice28

Schenck v. County of Sonoma, ___Cal.App.4th___, Case No. A129646 (1st Dist. Aug. 26, 2011).

Second District Holds City Failed to Comply with Its Charter and to Adopt Appropriate Findings in Granting a Variance and Use Permit30

West Chandler Boulevard Neighborhood Association v. City of Los Angeles, ___Cal.App.4th___, Case Nos. B22663, B22948 (2nd Dist. published Sept. 6, 2011).