Overview of the California Environmental Quality Act: statute adoption, legal basis, implementation, technical considerations and methodologies, impact assessment, mitigation and litigation.

1. CP110: Introduction to
City Planning
Environmental Impact
Assessment
UC Berkeley
April 4, 2011

2. Today’s Lecture
-Understand the basics of CEQA
-Understand the role of a Lead Agency
-Q&A

3. About the
Planning Department

4. MISSION STATEMENT
“The San Francisco
Planning Department promotes
the orderly, harmonious
use of land and improved quality of life
for our diverse community and
future generations.”

5. Role of the Department in San Francisco
The Department:
 Works with elected officials, community organizations, and
other stakeholders and policymakers to prioritize policy goals
for San Francisco
 Provides the policy structure and framework for land use
issues
 Develops and supports social policy through land use and
related mechanisms
 Reviews development for conformity to the Planning Code
 Acts as Lead Agency for CEQA, ensuring that environmental
impacts reviewed and disclosed

6. Planning Department Organizational Structure
Planning
Commission
Planning
Director
Administration
Major
Environmental
Analysis
Neighborhood
Planning Operations Zoning
Administrator
Citywide
Planning

7. Citywide Planning
 Long Range Planning
 Provides policy development and implementation
tools through
• Professional expertise
• Coordination with community, policymakers

8. Neighborhood Planning
 Current Planning
 Implements land use policy through review of
development permits

9. Major Environmental Analysis (MEA)
 Identifies potential for adverse impacts of proposed
projects and policies
 Mitigates effects through implementation of
Mitigation Measures, or through the development of
project alternatives that reduce, avoid or eliminate
significant project impacts
 Disseminates information to the public and decision-makers

10. Context

11. Enacted in 1970 in response to growing
awareness of environmental impacts must
be carefully considered in order to avoid
unanticipated environmental problems
resulting from development or planning
efforts

12. McAteer-Petris Act (est. BCDC) in 1965
National Environmental Policy Act 1969
California Environmental Quality Act 1970
California Coastal Commission 1972
Clean Water Act 1972

13. Legislative Intent

14. Promote public participation
Disclose potential adverse physical
impacts on the environment
Prevent environmental damage
Reduce environmental effects through
mitigation and project alternatives

15. Establishes state Office of Planning and
Research (OPR)
Issues mandatory CEQA Guidelines
Acts as a Clearinghouse, distributes
CEQA documents to Trustee and
Responsible Agencies for review and
comment

16. Applies to “projects” that require
discretionary approval (versus ministerial
approval)
Initially applied only to public projects, later
broadened through Frie nd s o f Mam m o th v.
Mo no Co unty

17. Project: any activity which may cause
either a direct physical change in the
environment, or a reasonably foreseeable
indirect physical change in the
environment
Projects could include legislation

18. Environment: the physical conditions
which exist within the area which will be
affected by a proposed project, including
land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna,
noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic
significance
Socio-economic effects (e.g., cost of
housing, gentrification, etc.) are outside
the scope of CEQA

19. A “lead agency” is the public agency which
has the principal responsibility for carrying
out or approving a project which may have
a significant effect on the environment
Responsible and/or trustee agencies could
also be involved in the CEQA process

20. Practical Application

21. Objective, quantitative and qualitative
analysis of Environmental Factors
Aesthetics, Ag/Forestry Resources, Air Quality,
Biological Resources, Cultural Resources,
Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
Hazards/Hazardous Materials, Hydrology, Land
Use, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and
Housing, Public Services, Recreation,
Transportation, Utilities, Mandatory Findings of
Significance

22. Significance Criteria
-would the project:
“disrupt or divide the neighborhood?” (Land
Use);
“substantially degrade the existing visual
character or obstruct a scenic vista?”
(Aesthetics)
“result in material damage to an historic
resource? (Cultural Resources)

23. Thresholds of Significance
-qualitative and/or quantitative for direct and
cumulative impacts
-relates to the change (delta) in baseline
conditions to future conditions with project;
outcome is what is significant (or not)
-lead agency may adopt local standards

24. Process

25. Exemptions
-Categorical Exemptions
-Statutory Exemptions
-Community Plan Exemptions

26. Initial Studies
Review of all environmental factors; scoping
document
Lead agency analyzes potential for
environmental effects
Makes findings for each environmental factor:
“less than significant; “less than significant with
mitigation” or “potentially significant”

27. Negative Declarations
written statement briefly describing the reasons
that a proposed project will not have a significant
effect on the environment and does not require
preparation of an environmental impact report.
attached to Initial Study
circulated for public review for 20-30 days and
adopted administratively

28. Environmental Impact Reports
Required when projects have the potential to
significantly impact the environment
May be “focused”, “project”, “program”
Initial Studies used to focus analysis and review
Draft EIRs circulated for public review and
comment for 45 days

29. Environmental Impact Reports
comments responded to in writing; Lead Agency
prepares “Comments & Responses document”
Draft EIR + Comments & Responses = Final EIR
government board or body certifies the FEIR as
“adequate, accurate, objective and complete.”
environmental findings

30. Environmental Impact Reports
CEQA requires lead agency identify
MITIGATION MEASURES for significant impacts
courts have held EIRs must discuss feasibility of
mitigation and that mitigation have a nexus to the
effect they relate to
EIRS must include range of ALTERNATIVES
that reduce, avoid or eliminate significant
impacts

31. Environmental Impact Reports
alternatives must include a “NO PROJECT”
alternative to describe what could happen if
project is not implemented
other alternatives could include a “reduced
intensity alternative” (e.g., generates less traffic);
“preservation alternative” (e.g., adaptive reuse of
historic building); “off site alternative” (e.g.,
avoids any peculiar condition at subject property)

32. Environmental Impact Reports
CEQA permits a Lead Agency to approve
projects despite SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE
IMPACTS
agency must prepare a STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS detailing
social, legal, technical, economic benefits of a
project that outweigh its environmental impacts

33. Appeals
exemptions, Neg Decs and EIRs may be
appealed
statute requires final appeal adjudicated by
ELECTED BODY (e.g., in SF Board of
Supervisors)
exemptions/Neg Decs: FAIR ARGUMENT
STANDARD
EIRs: SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE STANDARD

34. Appeals
if Exemption or Neg Dec appealed and decision-makers
find potential for impact, additional
analysis required, possibly in EIR (fair argument)
EIRs could be appealed on the grounds that
there is substantial evidence of potential impact,
could require additional analysis and
recirculation
appellants must exhaust administrative
remedies, before litigating in court

35. Project Approval
Commission, Board or other decision-making
body cannot consider project approval (e.g.,
Conditional Use permit, General Plan
Amendment, Variance, Master Plan, etc) until
environmental review is completed and all
administrative appeal remedies are exhausted.
Litigation could put injunction against project until
courts make final determination on CEQA

36. thank you