Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 20, 2015G049691California9,623 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ikola, J.

FACTS

We describe in this section: (1) the City’s general plan, as it pertained to Banning Ranch; (2) the City’s coastal land use plan, which, by its own terms, did not apply to Banning Ranch; (3) the proposed Project; (4) the draft EIR; (5) The City’s response to comments and final EIR; (6) the City’s approval of the Project; and (7) the procedural history of this action. Keep in mind the primary legal disputes: (a) What actions were required of the City vis-à-vis the Coastal Commission, prior to Project approval, regarding the decision whether to develop, preserve, or restore particular portions of Banning Ranch; and (b) Was the City required to designate ESHAs in the

EIR?

The City’s General Plan, as it Pertains to Banning Ranch “Each planning agency shall prepare and the legislative body of each county and city shall adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical

2 Collectively, the parties’ thorough, well-researched “briefs” exceed 300 pages. The City’s appendix features 1,489 pages and the Conservancy’s appendix adds 98 pages. The electronic administrative record totals a whopping 49,046 pages. We have striven to limit our recitation of facts to those…

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.