Agenda - Planning Commission - 01/07/2010

Home

;1 ii II II 10 II I :1 I 0) . \ U Zoning Bulletin October 25, 20091 Volume 31 Nd. 20 In June 2002, the Department issued a notice of preparation, stat- ing that the city would: (i) be the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA");and (2) prepare an environ- mental impact report ("EIR") for the project. CEQA "requires pub- lic agencies to consider the environmental impacts of proposed proj- ects and to mitigate or avoid significant impacts, if feasible." To that end, CEQA requires that a public agency "prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an EIR for any project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant impact on the environment." (Cal. Pub. Resources Code ~~ 21100, subd. (a), 21151, subd. (a).) While the city considered Las Lomas' proposed project, Las Lo- mas allegedly spent millions of dollars in an effort to comply with the city's requirements. Among amounts expended, Las Lomas paid all funds requested by the city for environmental review, and millions of dollars to consultants and others to prepare environmental studies . and planning documents and to meet with city officials. In March 2008, the city council voted to, among other things: '''cease all work' on the proposed project"; "not assume the role of Lead Agency"; and "not process an EIR." Las Lomas filed an action in court. Among other things, it alleged that, after commencing the environmental review process, the city had a mandatory duty under CEQA to complete its. environmental review before making any decision to approve or reject the project. The city countered that it had no obligation under CEQA to com- plete an EIR for the project because: (i) CEQA applies only to proj- ects that a public agency intends to carry out or approve; and (2) the city had rejected Las Lomas' proposed project. The trial c~urt found for the city. Las Lomas appealed. DECISION: Affirmed. The Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 3, California, held that the city had no duty to complete the EIR for Las Lomas' pr~- posed project ifter the city rejected the project. In reaching its conclusion, the cornt emphasized that "CEQA ap- plies only to projects that a public agency proposes to carry out or approve, and does not apply to projects that the agency rejects or dis- approves." {Pub. Resources Code ~~ 21080, subd. (b)(5).) "A public agency need not prepare an EIR for a project that it rejects." Las Lomas had argued that CEQA, (Pub. Resources Code) ~ 21061 established a mandatory duty for a public agency to complete and cer- tify an EIR before approving or rejecting any project. Section 21061 provided that when an EIR is "required by this division," the EIR has @ 2009 Thomsol') Reuters 3 19