Court Gets Down In The Weeds On Capitol CEQA Case

In a case that could be viewed as an example of judicial micromanagement under the California Environmental Quality Act, the environmental impact report for the billion-dollar renovation and expansion of the State Capitol complex in Sacramento has been partially thrown out, mostly because the Department of General Services made changes to the design after circulating the revised EIR. The 63-page ruling, written by Acting Presiding Justice Harry Hull, contained a very detailed analysis of the project’s design, potential impacts, and potential alternatives – down to the point of specifically describing a visual depiction that the state should have included in the EIR and an alternative that the state should have considered but did not. It would appear as though Justice Hull gave the EIR close scrutiny in part because it involved the State Capitol building, which he called “a treasured historical resource.” Justice Louis Mauro concurred on some aspects of the ruling but dissented on the question of having to provide a specific additional visual representation. Reversing a Sacramento County Superior Court judge, the Third District Court of Appeal found fault with the EIR’s project description, its project description, its analysis of the project’s impacts on historical resources and aesthetics, and its analysis of alternatives. All the EIR inadequacies, however, stemmed from late changes to the design that were included in the final EIR but not the revised EIR that was circulated.

Want to read more?

Subscribe to cp-dr.com to keep reading this exclusive post.

Subscribe Now