Landvalue 77, LLC v. Board of Trustees of California State University
193 Cal. App. 4th 675
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Campus Pointe is a mixed‑use 45‑acre development on the Fresno State campus, developed by a private firm under a land sublease from a university auxiliary organization, with housing, offices, retail, a hotel, and a 14‑screen theater.
- Appellants sued alleging a trustee violated a conflict‑of‑interest statute and the final EIR violated CEQA (cal. pub. resources §21000 et seq.).
- The trial court voided the theater sub‑sublease for conflict of interest and found deficiencies in traffic, water, and air‑quality analyses in the EIR.
- The trial court ordered remedies including revising traffic and water analyses and addressing the indirect source rule, but did not issue a peremptory writ of mandate at that time.
- On appeal, appellants urged overturning the entire project and issuing broader CEQA remedies; respondents argued severance or partial remedies were appropriate and no injunction was proper.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| CEQA remedies—whether to void entire project or sever the defects | Severance; only defective aspects require remedy. | Partial relief sufficient under CEQA; avoid voiding whole project. | Whole project approvals must be set aside; not partial certification. |
| Necessity of a peremptory writ of mandate under PRC 21168.9 | Trial court must issue a peremptory writ as directed. | Judgment and writ can operate without labeled form. | Remand to issue a peremptory writ of mandate. |
| Scope of remedy for conflict of interest under §1090 | Broader remedy beyond theater sublease should be imposed. | No broader remedy warranted by law. | Remedy limited to the challenged conflict under §1090; broader voiding not required. |
| Whether the court erred by not enjoining construction | Construction should be enjoined to prevent noncompliant CEQA effects. | Discretionary decision not to enjoin was proper. | No abuse of discretion in declining to enjoin construction. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield, 124 Cal.App.4th 1184 (2004) (lead agency must certify a legally adequate EIR before project approval; approvals void if not)
- San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center v. County of Merced, 149 Cal.App.4th 645 (2007) (certification of EIR inadequate may require voiding approvals)
- Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency, 116 Cal.App.4th 1099 (2004) (inadequate water resources discussion may lead to remand for CEQA compliance)
- Anderson First Coalition v. City of Anderson, 130 Cal.App.4th 1173 (2005) (severance principles and CEQA remedy framework)