Legal Opinion
Banker's Hill, Hillcrest, Park West Community Preservation Group v. City of San Diego
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 8, 2006No. D046360PublishedCited by 52 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
IRION, J.
In this appeal we are asked to decide whether respondent City of San Diego (the City) properly determined that the proposed development of a 14-story residential building is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) 1 under a categorical exemption for urban in-fill development projects set forth in the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (Guidelines) adopted by the Secretary of the California Resources Agency (the Secretary). 2 (Guidelines, § 15332.)
For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the judgment.
I
FACTUAL AND…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Laurel Heights Improvement Ass'n of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Wildlife Alive v. ChickeringCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Laurel Heights Improvement Ass'n of San Francisco, Inc. v. Regents of University of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Save Our Peninsula Committee v. Monterey County Board of SupervisorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of BerkeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 2015
- Sierra Club v. City of OrangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Eureka Citizens for Responsible Government v. City of EurekaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Porterville Citizens for Responsible Hillside Development v. City of PortervilleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Preserve Poway v. City of PowayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.