ELR Citation: 42 ELR 20259
No(s). G045622 (Cal. Ct. App. 4th Dist. Dec 12, 2012)

A California appellate court affirmed a lower court decision denying a conservation group's petition seeking to vacate a city's certification of an environmental impact report (EIR) for the development of a park. The group argued that the EIR wrongly defined the project to exclude pending residential and commercial development on an adjacent property. The group claimed the park and development are one interrelated project to which the city is giving improper “piecemeal” review under the California Environmental Quality Act. But the court disagreed. The EIR's project definition properly excluded the neighboring development, which is not a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the park. Rather, the two are separate projects with different proponents, serving different purposes. In addition, the EIR adequately analyzed the park's cumulative traffic impacts, growth-inducing impacts, cumulative biological impacts, as well as impacts on the California gnatcatcher's habitat. Substantial evidence supported the EIR's conclusions, and the city did not prejudicially abuse its discretion by approving it.