(California Court of Appeal) - In an appeal from a judgment denying plaintiff's petition for a writ of mandate challenging the decision of the County of Riverside to approve development of a master-planned community build forward as Specific contrivance 380 by real party in interest,and asserting the County failed to comply with procedural, informational, or substantive provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),the denial of the petition is affirmed where: 1) the County properly approved the project after the contrivance was modified; 2) the County properly adopted findings, a statement of overriding considerations, or a mitigation contrivance concurrently with its approval; 3) the Notice of Determination errors attain not justify unwinding the County's approval of the project; 4) the County did not err in its decision not to recirculate the EIR; 5) the EIR adequately analyzes impacts of uses in the mixed use area; and 6) the EIR adequately considered specific suggestions for mitigating the impact of the project on air quality and noise levels.
Source: findlaw.com