Steve Kostka, Julie Jones and Barbara Schussman The eagerly-awaited amendments to SB 731, the “CEQA Modernization Bill” have surfaced. The initial iteration of this bill was a placeholder which outlined topics that would be included in later amendments. As amended on April 23, the bill addresses many of the issues presaged by the initial version,… Continue Reading
Category Archives: CEQA
Subscribe to CEQA RSS FeedPlan Bay Area: ABAG and MTC Publish Draft EIR
Posted in CEQA, Climate Change, Land UseThe Association of Bay Area Governments and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission today released the Draft Environmental Impact Report on their “Plan Bay Area,” a long-range regional planning document proposed to better align future land use planning with the Bay Area’s transportation infrastructure. Plan Bay Area implements SB 375, which was enacted in 2008 and requires… Continue Reading
New Significance Standard for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Is Not New Information Triggering Supplemental CEQA Review
Posted in CEQA, Climate Change, Land UseThe court of appeal opinion issued today in Concerned Dublin Citizens clearly answers three CEQA questions which haven’t been directly addressed in other published opinions: the proper interpretation of the statutory exemption for housing projects that are consistent with a specific plan; how the CEQA guideline on further review following a program EIR should be… Continue Reading
New Opinion, Same Result – Project Objectives Are Upheld Under CEQA, But Alternatives Analysis Is Invalid
Posted in CEQAIn 2008, the City of Santa Cruz and the University of California settled litigation challenging the University’s long-term development plan for expanding the UC Santa Cruz campus. A key provision of the settlement agreement required the city to seek approvals from the Local Agency Formation Commission for providing water and sewer service to the part… Continue Reading
CEQ Issues Handbooks on Coordinating NEPA Review with Review Under CEQA and Review Under the Historic Preservation Act
Posted in CEQA, Environmental Regulation, NEPAOn March 5, 2013, the Council on Environmental Quality released a handbook intended to help agencies and practitioners coordinate environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act with overlapping review requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act. It also released a separate handbook on coordination of review under NEPA and the National Historic Preservation Act. Neither handbook makes new… Continue Reading
New CEQA Bill – Cure or Band-Aid?
Posted in CEQAIn response to a business community campaign calling for broad CEQA reform, California State Senator Senate President pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg released his highly anticipated CEQA “modernization” bill, SB 731. So far, the bill is more remarkable for what it lacks, than for what it contains: A Co-author. 2012’s chief CEQA reform champion, Senator Michael… Continue Reading
Use of Project-Specific Significance Thresholds Does Not Violate CEQA
Posted in CEQAThe first published California Environmental Quality Act case of 2013, Save Cuyama Valley v. County of Santa Barbara, strongly endorsed a lead agency’s authority to use its own, project-specific significance thresholds in an environmental impact report. In addition, the court upheld the county’s project approval despite finding that one of the EIR’s environmental impact findings… Continue Reading
Supreme Court to Decide Whether City Council’s Adoption of Voter-Sponsored Initiative is Exempt from CEQA
Posted in CEQAThe California Supreme Court announced on February 13 it has accepted review of Tuolumne Jobs & Small Business Alliance v. Superior Court, the recent decision (see our November 2 post) holding that a city council cannot choose to enact a voter-sponsored initiative without first complying with CEQA. A previous published CEQA case had reached the… Continue Reading
CEQA Year in Review 2012 — A Summary of Published Appellate Opinions Relating to CEQA
Posted in CEQAIntroduction While CEQA reform became a hot topic for a few days near the end of the 2012 legislative session — but then foundered — the appellate courts continued to issue CEQA decisions at a rapid clip. As is common in a challenging economy, the courts were generally less receptive to CEQA claims than they… Continue Reading
CEQA Doesn’t Apply to Declaration of Water Emergency Authorized by Judgment Governing Groundwater Basin
Posted in CEQA, Water SupplyA water replenishment district’s declaration of a water emergency was not subject to CEQA because the declaration itself had no environmental impact, it was authorized under the terms of a judgment imposing a physical solution on the groundwater basin, and the district had no discretion to alter the terms of the judgment which specify the consequences… Continue Reading
EIR’s Project Description For Municipal Park Properly Excluded Proposed Development On Adjacent Property Claimed to Be a Related Project
Posted in CEQAIn rejecting the claim that the City of Newport Beach improperly “piecemealed” its environmental review of a municipal park project, the court upheld the city’s decision to exclude from the EIR’s project description a pending proposal to build residential and commercial uses on an adjacent property. The court based its ruling on the principle that… Continue Reading
An Attorney Petitioner in a CEQA Suit Can Be Awarded Attorneys’ Fees
Posted in CEQAIn a case of first impression, a court of appeal has held that an attorney can be a named petitioner in a CEQA case, litigate the case on behalf of all of the petitioners, and then, if the litigation succeeds, obtain an award of attorneys’ fees from the defendants for her work. Healdsburg Citizens for Sustainable… Continue Reading
U.C. Santa Cruz Expansion Plan EIR Overturned
Posted in CEQA, Water SupplyIn Habitat and Watershed Caretakers v. City of Santa Cruz, the court of appeal set aside the EIR for long-term development of the U.C. Santa Cruz campus. The city and the University of California had settled litigation challenging the University’s development plan. A key provision of the agreement required the city to seek Local Agency… Continue Reading
Water Supply Uncertainty Sinks Another EIR
Posted in CEQA, Water SupplyAfter wading through a detailed discussion relating to biological impacts (see Perkins Coie Update), the court in Preserve Wild Santee v. City of Santee dove into issues surrounding an EIR’s analysis of water supplies. The court found the EIR invalid in part because it failed to consider the uncertainty of State Water Project water supplies…. Continue Reading
Court Rules City Council Can’t Skip CEQA By Adopting Voter-Proposed Legislation
Posted in CEQA, Land UseProject proponents often ask whether there is a way to shortcut the CEQA timeline or head off litigation. In Tuolumne Jobs & Small Business Alliance v. Superior Court, the court of appeal squelched what had looked like a potential path around CEQA: use of the initiative process to adopt voter-initiated legislation, without placing the legislation… Continue Reading
Water Supply Agreement for Casino Fails CEQA and LAFCO Tests
Posted in CEQA, Climate Change, Water SupplyIn a case packed with hot-button issues — CEQA exemptions, water supply impacts, climate change, LAFCO regulation of land uses, and preemption of state law on tribal lands — a court of appeal has ruled that the El Dorado Irrigation District erred in approving an agreement to supply water to a tribal casino. Background. In… Continue Reading
Under CEQA Non-Prejudicial Errors Do Not Invalidate an EIR.
Posted in CEQAThe County of Siskiyou certified an Environmental Impact Report for a project to expand an existing manufacturing facility to accommodate a cogeneration power plant housed on one acre of a 300-acre site. Environmental groups claimed the EIR violated CEQA by failing to include adequate project alternatives and failing to fully disclose, analyze, and mitigate the… Continue Reading
CEQA Review Not Required for Ballot Measure Requiring Competitive Bidding for City’s Solid Waste Contracts
Posted in CEQAMeasures put on the ballot by a city council are not automatically exempt from CEQA even though they must be approved or disapproved by the voters. As shown in a recent appellate court decision, however, CEQA review is not required for a ballot measure that does not commit the city to a “project” as that… Continue Reading
Can a Premature Notice of Exemption Trigger CEQA’s Short Limitations Period?
Posted in CEQACEQA provides an extraordinarily brief period for bringing suit if a public agency files the proper notice with the county clerk – 30 days for project approvals based on a negative declaration or an EIR, and 35 days for projects that are exempt. If the agency fails to file a notice, a challenger has 180… Continue Reading
City Suing School District Can Recover Attorneys’ Fees, But Loses Most CEQA Claims
Posted in CEQADecisions by school districts and colleges to build new schools or expand existing ones frequently lead to CEQA challenges from local cities. In the most recent of these conflicts to reach the court of appeal, the City of Maywood won confirmation that it was eligible to recover attorneys’ fees from a school district, but saw… Continue Reading
Decision on use of Future CEQA Baseline to be Reviewed by the Supreme Court
Posted in CEQAThe California Supreme Court has decided to review the court of appeal decision in the Los Angeles Metro Line EIR case, the widely publicized decision in which the court of appeal upheld an EIR that used projected future conditions as the baseline for guaging the project’s environmental impacts. The court of appeal decision is the latest in a series dealing with the question… Continue Reading
EIR Required for Oak Woodland Management Plan
Posted in CEQAPublic agencies generally prefer not to prepare EIRs – at least for their own plans and projects – unless they have to. And CEQA attempts to avoid redundancy by encouraging reliance, to the extent possible, on a previously certified EIR to support the approval of a subsequent action. So, in 2008, when El Dorado County… Continue Reading
CEQA and EIR Adequacy: The Latest Words on Public Services Impacts and Adaptive Mitigation Programs
Posted in CEQA, Exactions and AssessmentsTwo important, recurring CEQA questions are answered by a recent court of appeal decision in a case involving the EIR for a California State University campus master plan: whether CEQA requires funding of mitigation for a project’s effects on public services; and whether an adaptive mitigation program for traffic and parking impacts improperly defers decisions about mitigation…. Continue Reading
New South Coast Air District Rules Withstand Manufacturer’s Second CEQA Challenge
Posted in CEQA, Environmental RegulationA court of appeal has upheld the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s second attempt to adopt a rule imposing strict limits on paint thinners and solvents. The court rejected a manufacturer’s claim that CEQA required the District to study alternatives and mitigation measures before adopting the new regulations. W.M. Barr & Co. v. South… Continue Reading