California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

BIG CREEK LUMBER CO. v. COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, H023778

Because timber production zoning does not constitute a change in the use of timberland, the Coastal Act does not require rezoning applications to be certified as Local Coastal Program amendments. Local zone district, riparian, and helicopter regulations adopted by defendant and pertaining to timber harvesting are expressly preempted by the state's Forest Practice Act.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 02/17/2004
  • Published 02/17/2004

Judges

  • WUNDERLICH, J.

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • Craig E. Stewart, San Francisco, Jones Day, Dennis J. Kehoe, Aptos, Law Offices of Dennis J. Kehoe, for Plaintiff and Appellants Big Creek Lumber Co. et al., Robert E. Bosso, Santa Cruz, Catherine A. Philipovitch, Bosso, Williams, Sachs, Atack & Gallagher, for Plaintiffs and Appellants Central Coast Forest Assn., Robin L. Rivett, Sacramento, and M. Reed Hopper, Pacific Legal Foundation, for amicus curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Appellants.

  • For Appellees:
  • Dana McRae, County of Santa Cruz, Fran M. Layton, San Francisco, Susannah T. French, Marlena G. Byrne, Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP, for Defendants and Appellants County of Santa Cruz., Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Richard M. Frank, Chief Asst. Atty. General, J. Matthew Rodriquez, Sr., Asst. Atty. General, Tara L. Mueller, Deputy Attorney General, for Defendants and Appellants, California Coastal Commission.
Copied to clipboard