Laserfiche WebLink
<br />E. t i"",t <br />nVlronmen ,"i,s/1" <br />Report Asked <br /> <br />fCI"1t.DflIY"''''''I'Il.y.TI~ But ~e court, In a 6-1 <br />SA:-i FRANC'SC~:\lost Call- deeision held that the law also <br />lomia c ~ m. m u n i.1 i e s . ~ve appli~ 'to private constructi~ <br />stopped ISSUing major bwldmg for which a development pefTlllt <br />permits beeause of a state of any kind must be oblained_ <br />Supreme Court ruling that the if the project's effecl on the en. <br />effect of such projects on the \'ironment would be "non- <br />environment must be inves. tri\ial." <br />tigated first. It is the most Important <br />Some others" In.eluding Lo:. ruling on the environment in <br />Angeles, are ISsumg permits the slate's history, according to <br />with "environmf'ntal disclaim_ spokE'smen for development in. <br />en;." Several banks ha\'e said teresls, conservationists and <br />they woo'' lend money on the stale and local government. <br />basis of such permits. "fany belie\'e the decision will <br />Before the court 8C;ed on force a major reappraisal of <br />Sept. 21, the state's 1970 En~'i- the growtb-oriented economy <br />ronmental Quality Act had Deen that in four decades bat trans.- <br />applied only to public work.'i formed California from a most- <br />projects that were deemed to Iy rural fann area to the most <br />have a "significant impact" on populous stale in the nation. <br />the environment. BOARD F:RRED <br />The court held that tbe Mono <br />County Board of Supervisors <br />erred last April 20 In Issuing a <br />conditional use pmnit to Inter- <br />national RecreatIon, Ltd., of La <br />Jolla, for a 184.unlt second- <br />home development. <br />The concern planned to build <br />an eight-story tower at the <br />Mammotb Lake Sid Resort area <br />OD the eastern slope of the <br />southern Sierra Nevada. E\'en- <br />tuaUy It hoped to build five or <br />six towers containing 350 to 400 <br />condominium apartments, each <br />selling for $35,/XIO to $70,000. <br />A suit was broultht by <br />Friends of ~fammoth, a group <br />of rt'sldents and homeowners in <br />the sparsely populated regiOl1 of <br />east-centra] California, who <br />C'Ontended that the development <br />would Spawn problems with <br />water. sewat:e, snow removal <br />and police prott"<'tion. <br /> <br />The court ruling was based <br />on a portion of the state E~vi- <br />ronmental Quality Act reqwrm~ <br />areas that have no adopted con. <br />servation element for their gen- <br />eral plan 10 "make an environ- <br />mental impact report on any <br />project they intend to carry out <br />, which may have a significant <br />. effect on the em1ronment and <br />, shall submit it to tbe local plan- <br />ning agency.. ," <br />The court ruling left ronslder- <br />able contusion over the definI. <br />tion of "significant lmpacl,." <br />which the court explained as <br />"nontrivial." There also was <br />uncertainty over what constl. <br />tute! 8 proper environmental <br />Impact statE'ment and .hether <br />the dedsion would be retroac- <br />tive to when the Em;romnentaJ <br />Quality Act lookeIfe<:I. <br />Gov, Ronllld Reagan' has <br />asked the attorney general', of. <br />fice to seek a delay In the <br />d e cIs ion's Implementation. <br />Unless challenged, the ruling <br />will take eUe<:t Oct. 21, <br /> <br />~> <br /><9 <br />