SAVE OUR SONORAN, INC. V. FLOWERS
408 F.3d 1113 (9th Cir. 2005)
NATURE OF THE CASE: 56th & Lone Mountain, L.L.C. (D) developer sought review of an order
from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, which granted Save our
Sonoran, Inc. (P) a Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 motion for a preliminary injunction suspending
development of a residential project during the pendency of litigation related to defendant
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) issuance of a permit under 404 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C.S. 1344.
FACTS: A dispute arose over a 608-acre parcel of undeveloped land. An alluvial fan
containing a significant number of braided washes. The washes constitute approximately 31.3
acres, which in fact constitute approximately 5% of the site, but affect approximately 19%
of the area. The property is surrounded on four sides by other developments. The land is
undeveloped desert, albeit not in pristine condition. The property was purchased from the
State at a public auction by Loan Mountain's (D) predecessor for $38.5 million. D wanted to
construct an upscale residential community of 794 single-family homes. Over half of the
property would be maintained permanently as open space, including 'the bulk of the larger
washes.' P applied for a Section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers to fill in 7.5
acres of natural waterways that flow through the property. The Corps found no significant
impact. The Corps invited public comment on the permit and received requests for a public
hearing, but declined to hold one. The United States Environmental Protection Agency ('EPA')
and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service ('FWS') opposed the issuance of the permit
and disagreed with the Corps' findings with respect to whether the site was a potentially
suitable habitat for the cactus ferruginous pygmy owl, which is listed as an endangered
species. The Arizona Game and Fish Department agreed with the Corps' findings. Save Our
Sonoran (P), a nonprofit group of citizens 'dedicated to the preservation' of the Sonoran
Desert, also made public comments about the proposed project. The Corps addressed the public
comments and issued the permit to D, subject to a few conditions. P sought a temporary
restraining order and preliminary injunctive relief against the Corps and D. The district
court granted a temporary restraining order to P and, after a hearing, the district court
ordered preliminary injunctive relief. After determining that there were serious questions
on the merits, the district court went on to conclude that the balance of hardships tipped
in favor of P. D continued construction on the site, and the district court made clear that,
in light of its previous factual findings, the status quo could be preserved only if D
ceased any and all development on the site until a hearing on the merits could be held. D
appealed both orders, and P filed a cross-appeal as to the amount of the bond set by the
district court.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment