The 1st lawsuit
After many attempts at collaborating and compromising with the developer, a significant legal move, was taken by the Nipomo Action Committee (NAC) and the California Native Plant Society, San Luis Obispo Chapter (CNPS), against the County of San Luis Obispo and its Board of Supervisors. We are contesting the approval of the Dana Reserve Specific Plan (DRSP), a proposed 288-acre mixed-use development project near Nipomo. Represented by the Law Offices of Babak Naficy and Eva Ulz, we argue that the project violates the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and related laws.
Key Issues Raised by Petitioners
Environmental Concerns
- Destruction of Biodiversity: The project site encompasses critical habitats, including 127 acres of oak woodlands that support rare plant and animal species. The Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) estimates the removal of nearly 4,000 oak trees, raising concerns over biodiversity loss. - Water Resource Mismanagement: The lawsuit asserts that the FEIR inadequately addresses water supply issues. It highlights that the Nipomo Community Services District
(NCSD) lacks the legal and physical capacity to meet the project’s estimated water demand of 2,388 acre-feet annually. - Wildfire Risks: The area’s high susceptibility to wildfires has sparked fears about the project’s impact on emergency response and evacuation. Fire experts and community
members have criticized the reliance on “temporary refuge areas,” deemed inadequate for wildfire scenarios.
Flaws in Project Alternatives and Mitigation
- Unexplored Alternatives: The lawsuit contends that viable, environmentally superior alternatives, such as the Burton Mesa Chaparral Avoidance Alternative, and even a community generated alternative were dismissed without substantial evidence. Both these options would reduce significant environmental impacts while still meeting housing goals.
- Unrealistic Mitigation Plans: The lawsuit criticizes the reliance on a future homeowners’ association (HOA) to finance and implement critical mitigation measures, questioning the feasibility of this approach.
Broader Implications
The lawsuit emphasizes the broader consequences of the DRSP:
– Affordable Housing Debate: The project prioritizes market-rate housing with limited affordable units, undermining state housing goals.
– Precedent for Environmental Law Compliance: The case could influence future developments by reinforcing rigorous adherence to CEQA’s standards.
What’s Next?
We seek a court order to revoke the DRSP’s approval and its FEIR certification. We also request an injunction to halt project activities until compliance with environmental and legal standards is ensured.
This case exemplifies the growing tension between development and environmental stewardship in California, highlighting the need for balanced, sustainable planning. As it unfolds, the outcome will resonate far beyond San Luis Obispo County, shaping the future of
land use and environmental policy in the state.