Response to Late Comments Item No.15

Home Browse Search

170.Petitioner respectfully requests that the Court issue a writ of mandate directing the 2 City to rescind and set aside its approval of Ordinance No. NS-3061 and an injunction restraining 3 the City and its agents, servants, and employees, and all others acting in concert with the City, 4 from taking any action to implement Ordinance No. NS-3061 pending full compliance with the 5 requirements of CEQA, the Guidelines, and all other applicable laws and regulations. 6 7 SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Declaratory Relief Code of Civil Procedure § 1060 et seq. 8 (Violation of CEQA)) 9 71. Petitioner incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs as though set forth 10 fully herein. 11 72. A present and actual controversy exists between Petitioner and the City concerning 12 the Citynon-compliance with CEQA. And unless declaratory or injunctive relief issues, the City 13 will continue to violate CEQA. Specifically, Petitioner contends that the City incorrectly 14 determined that Ordinance No. NS-3061 is not Ordinance No. NS- 15 3061 is not subject to CEQA review. 16 73. The City, in Ordinance No. NS-3061, disputes this contention and asserts that no 17 CEQA review of Ordinance No. NS-3061 is necessary due to the fact it is not a qualifying 18 19 74. Given this clear dispute, Petitioner requires and is entitled to a declaration 20 establishing that the City has violated CEQA by foregoing environmental review of Ordinance No. 21 NS-3061 based upon the determination Ordinance No. NS-3061 was not a project. 22 23 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Code of Civil Procedure § 1060 et seq. 24 (Common Law Nonconforming Use)) 25 75. Petitioner incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs as though set forth 26 fully herein. 27 / / / 28 VERIFIED PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE AND COMPLAINT 20