Final ruling in People's Park case turns around on one issue and softens the argument on the other -- but prompts Newsom to vow CEQA reform.

An Arcadia homeowner wanted to stop the expansion of his neighbor's home. He took it to the Court of Appeal -- but he wasn't specific enough in his original comments before the city's planning commission and city council.

Appellate judges say that density transfer creates potential environmental impacts and therefore an "excxeption to the exemption" under Berkeley Hillside is warranted.

San Diego judge's decision also faults the City of San Diego for not analyzing cumuative impacts of several adjacent projects.

Still, some jurists still focus on expanding the law, creating a kind of schism in the appellate courts. Will the Legislature step in to clarify? Not likely.

Among other things, the appellate ruling found that Livermore's design standards are not objective and therefore cannot be used to deny an affordable housing project.

But appellate justices say state was correct that aesthetics is a subjective matter and not inherently a significant impact.

Drillers claim city should have done a full environmental impact report and misinterpreted CEQA guidance on mineral resources.

100% affordable project can't be struck down based on subjective standards or lack of strict adherence to specific plan policies. CEQA exemption based on Downtown Specific Plan was also upheld.

State's 2045 goals could also upend CEQA practice and do away with thresholds.