California Oak Foundation v. Regents of the University of California

Good Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 3d 631·188 Cal. App. 4th 227·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1555
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 3, 2010A122511California25,607 words

Opinion

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

Appellants challenge the judgment entered after the trial court denied their petition for writ of mandate (petition). In that petition, appellants sought to compel the Regents of the University of California (Regents) to rescind certification of an environmental impact report (EIR) prepared for seven related projects at the University of California, Berkeley (University), and its approval of the proposed Student Athlete High Performance Center (Athlete Center), the first phase of one such project. On appeal, appellants contend the Regents violated two statutes in certifying the EIR and approving the Athlete Center: the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Alquist-Priolo Act), Public Resources Code section 2621 et seq., and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.

For reasons soon explained, we conclude the Regents complied with both statutes in certifying the EIR and approving the Athlete Center project. Specifically, we conclude that, while the Athlete Center is subject to the Alquist-Priolo Act based on its proposed location within an earthquake fault zone, the Regents could properly find the Athlete Center…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.