Legal Opinion
California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 20, 2009No. H032502PublishedCited by 73 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McADAMS, J.
This case arises under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).1
Acting through its city council, respondent City of Santa Cruz (City) approved a master plan for Arana Gulch, a City-owned greenbelt property. In approving that project, the City certified an environmental impact report (EIR). As acknowledged in the EIR and in findings made by the City, the project will have a significant effect on the habitat of the Santa Cruz tarplant due to the chosen alignment of a multiuse trail. The City nevertheless found that overriding considerations warranted approval.
Claiming…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & OpportunityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Laurel Heights Improvement Ass'n of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho CordovaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
- Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by73 opinions
- Sierra Club v. County of FresnoCalifornia Supreme Court · 2018
- Rialto Citizens for Responsible Growth v. City of RialtoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v. County of MaderaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- Keep Our Mountains Quiet v. County of Santa ClaraCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Citizens for a Sustainable Treasure Island v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.