My colleague, Barbara Brenner, posted an environmental law alert on the recently published CEQA decision issued by the California Third District Court of Appeal in Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Ctr. v. County of Siskiyou, No. C064930, 2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 1088 (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 26, 2012).  The case is significant because it provides precedent for a lead agency and project proponent to reject project alternatives that are not feasible, thus avoiding the time and cost of analyzing infeasible alternatives.  In addition, the Court concluded that analysis of the project and the No Project alternative constituted a reasonable range of alternatives where the agency could identify no other feasible alternatives.  Based on the Court’s determination, a record clearly showing there is no feasible project alternative can be upheld.

Photo of Kristen Castaños Kristen Castaños

Kristen Castaños is a highly respected California environmental and land use lawyer. Known for her practical and business-focused advice, Kristen works with commercial, industrial and energy developers on due diligence, compliance and related litigation involving California’s key environmental and land use laws, including…

Kristen Castaños is a highly respected California environmental and land use lawyer. Known for her practical and business-focused advice, Kristen works with commercial, industrial and energy developers on due diligence, compliance and related litigation involving California’s key environmental and land use laws, including the California Environmental Quality Act, the California Williamson Act, the Warren Alquist Act and the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Kristen also works with municipal and public entity clients, having successfully represented several California counties, municipalities and a redevelopment agency on CEQA and related land use issues.