Environmental Law Portal

Welcome to the Beveridge & Diamond Environmental Law Portal.

Beveridge & Diamond’s 100 lawyers in seven U.S. offices focus on environmental and natural resource law, litigation and dispute resolution. We help clients around the world resolve critical environmental and sustainability issues relating to their products, facilities, and operations. 

Subscribe for updates via:

Meet the Contributors


Recent Posts

Click here to learn more about us

Showing 7 posts in CEQA.

San Mateo Gardens Teaches College District a Lesson on Picking Thorny Subsequent Review Procedure

The California Supreme Court recently addressed an important California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) issue: Who decides whether CEQA’s subsequent review provisions are applicable when there are changes to an adopted project? Subsequent review provisions include a subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration (ND), a supplemental EIR, or an addendum to an EIR or ND.  When a project that has been reviewed and finalized under CEQA is altered, what type of review process under CEQA is required, if any?  As we said in our last update on Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College District et al., (2016) 1 Cal.5th 937 (Friends of the College), the Court determined that the lead agency makes this determination.  The question that the lead agency should be analyzing is whether the original document “retains some informational value” – if it does, then CEQA’s subsequent review procedures apply.  Should the lead agency’s decision be challenged, then the Court must decide whether “substantial evidence” supports the lead agency’s conclusion. Read More ›

Introducing Our California Environmental Tracker

The San Francisco Office of Beveridge & Diamond, P.C. is pleased to announce a new series of articles dedicated to developments in California environmental law. California has long been a driver of environmental policy, often setting demanding regulatory standards and leveraging its mammoth market share to compel national compliance. Read More ›

“New and Improved” is Not Always a Good Slogan Under CEQA

Marketing departments in major corporations love to describe products as “new and improved” in order to convince you that the product is something you need. In many cases though, you already have the product; the new and improved version is actually the same with just a few minor changes. Read More ›

CEQA Guidelines Comments: Once In a Generation Chance

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) directs that certain proposed projects undergo environmental review to assess and mitigate significant environmental impacts. The CEQA Guidelines provide procedures and clarification on how to perform the reviews. The Guidelines are often cited in legal challenges to CEQA reviews. Read More ›

As Predicted, California Supreme Court Agrees with CEQA Mitigation Requirement

Last February, I wrote about the California State University Board of Trustees’ (CSU) unique stance concerning their responsibilities under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).  CSU agrees that like every other private developer, it has a duty to mitigate for significant impacts on the environment from its development projects.  However, they do not budget for the cost of mitigation for off-campus impacts as part of the project.  Rather, CSU argues that off-campus mitigation is a separate cost and their only responsibility is to request funds from the Californian legislature and if not appropriated, then CSU can move forward with the project without mitigating. Read More ›

Big House CEQA Exemption on Firm Foundation

The Berkeley Hillside Preservation association wasn’t thrilled with a new neighbor’s plans to demolish an existing house and build a 6,478-square-foot house with an attached 3,394-square-foot 10-car garage on a slope in the Berkeley, California hills.   The association challenged the plans asserting that the City of Berkeley violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) when it approved the building permit and determined that the project was categorically exempt from further environmental analysis. Read More ›

CEQA’s Mitigation Requirement: No Public v. Private Distinction

The California State University Board of Trustees (CSU) understandably takes the position that in this era of tightening budgets, its funds should only be used for education related improvements.  When it comes to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), CSU agrees that like every other private developer, it has a duty to mitigate for significant impacts from its development projects.  But it adds a wrinkle.  CSU argues that they can only commit to mitigation if the California legislature grants separate mitigation funding. Read More ›