.
Identity: City of Davis v. Coleman, US Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit, 07/30/1975.
Summary of Facts:.
The city of Davis is suing Caltrans because of the Kidwell project. According to Caltrans, the purpose of the Kidwell project is to replace a temporary hazardous access to I-80. Davis filed an injunction in district Court on the grounds that Caltrans did not hold public hearings as required by 23 USC *128 and failed to file an EIR/S. Under NEPA/CEQA, federal agencies contemplating major action must prepare an EIS/R if this action could have a significant adverse affect on the quality of the human environment. The conflict between the district and circuit courts is the primary and secondary effects of the Kidwell project. The district ct looked at the primary effects and the circuit ct looked at the secondary effects (increased traffic, population etc.) of the Kidwell project. Davis claims that the Kidwell project is part of a major development plan. If this is true, increased development will increase demands, which will significantly adversely effect the environment. However, Caltrans maintains that the project is to replace a hazardous temporary road and provide a needed crossing for farm vehicles.
Procedure:.
The district ct ruled that Davis had to show harm and establish standing to sue under NEPA/CEQA. Davis is appealing in the ninth circuit appellate court. Based on NEPA/CEQA Davis wants Caltrans to asses and document how the Kidwell project will adversely affect the human environment.
Issues:.
Does Davis bare the burden of proof to show and establish standing to sue under NEPA/CEQA.
Holding: .
Caltrans must assess and document EIR/S under NEPA/CEQA.
Rationale:.
The circuit looked at the secondary effects of the Kidwell project and acknowledged that the most serious effects on the human environment may not be obvious.
