Town of Atherton v. California High-Speed Rail Authority

Good Law
175 Cal. Rptr. 3d 145·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 670·228 Cal. App. 4th 314·2014 WL 3665045
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 24, 2014C070877California16,478 words

Opinion

Opinion

Duarte, J.

California has long contemplated a high-speed rail system connecting its southern and northern regions. In 1996 when the Legislature established defendant California High-Speed Rail Authority (the Authority), it declared the need for an intercity rail system operating at high speeds to complement the existing infrastructure of highways and airports. (Pub. Util. Code, § 185010.) As plans for a high-speed rail system developed, the system’s alignment — simply put, where to lay the track — from the Central Valley to the San Francisco Bay Area became an issue. At the heart of the dispute in this case is the Authority’s decision that trains traveling between those destinations should travel through the Pacheco Pass rather than further north at the Altamont Pass.

Petitioners challenge the adequacy of the revised final program environmental impact report/environmental impact statement (PEIR) and the approval of the Pacheco Pass network alternative as the route for the high-speed train (HST) system to connect the San Francisco Bay Area and the Central Valley. They contend the revised final PEIR violates the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, §…

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.