Moss

Moss v. County of Humboldt

Good Law
162 Cal. App. 4th 1041·76 Cal. Rptr. 3d 428
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 7, 2008A114205, A114622California10,155 words

Opinion

Opinion

McGUINESS, J.

These two appeals require us to decide the appropriate level of review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a subdivision project that was initially approved with a mitigated negative declaration but later languished in litigation for so long that its tentative map expired. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Humboldt (County) determined an environmental impact report (EIR) is now required for the subdivision, either because it should be considered as a new project under CEQA or because new information suggests the existence of potential environmental impacts. On a petition for writ of mandate from the landowner, Michael Moss, the trial court rejected the argument that the subdivision is a new project but upheld the County’s determination that an EIR is required based on new information about environmental impacts. Moss and the County separately appealed from this judgment, and we consolidated the appeals for decision. We agree with the trial court that the subdivision is not a new project for purposes of CEQA but that supplemental environmental review is required based on new information about certain potentially significant impacts. Because we…

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.