ESP 179 MIDTERM/FINAL REVIEW (CEQA PROCESS)
Goals of CEQA - Answers - 1) Identify environmental impacts
2) Inform decision-makers
3) Disclose to the public
4) Facilitate interagency
5) Enhance public participation
CEQA review - Answers - Subject:
1) Government activities that may have a physical impact on environment
2) Public projects
3) Private projects requiring discretionary public approval
Friends of Mammoth case (Friends of Mammoth v. Mono County Board of Supervisors,
1972) - Answers - court case finding that CEQA applies in instances in which state
regulates private activity (public discretionary approval)
-not just when government engages in development
lead agency - Answers - party responsible for ensuring the analysis is conducted
properly and using the review to inform decision-making
-private project: principal responsibility for approving project (ex. City Council)
-public projects: proposes project as well (ex. CA Dept. of Water Resources)
project proponent - Answers - party that is proposing the project
-private projects: developer or property owner
-public projects: government agency
responsible agency - Answers - any other agency that must give their approval for a
project to proceed
consultants - Answers - typically perform CEQA impact analysis
-costs paid by project proponents
trustee agency - Answers - several public agencies are given jurisdiction for natural
resources held in trust for people of CA
-if project potentially impacts one of these resources, the relevant trustee agency must
be consulted in impact assessment process
-either CA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
-State Lands Commission
-CA Dept.. of Parks and Rec
-University of California
courts (role) - Answers - two primary roles
-settle lawsuits for individual projects
, -alter the interpretation and future application of CEQA
public (role) - Answers - public has privileged position under CEQA
-goal of CEQA is public disclosure
-entitled to public notifications and meetings, comment letters, ability to sue
threshold of significance - Answers - line between a significant and less than significant
impact
-CEQA does NOT specify what these should be
-vary on a case-by-case basis
significant impacts (degrees) - Answers - -significant impact
-unavoidable impact
-irreversible impact
CEQA guidelines - Answers - text of the law and standard operating procedures of
CEQA
-administered by the state Office of Planning and Research
categorical exemptions - Answers - classes of projects which typically do not have
significant impacts
-33 categories
-ex. repair/maintenance of existing structures, small projects (less than 10,000 square
feet), minor additions to schools
statutory exemptions - Answers - exemptions made by legislature, regardless of impacts
-these are policy decisions
-ex. family day care homes, 1984 LA Olympics, some mass transit projects, small infill &
affordable housing projects
initial study - Answers - preliminary assessment to determine if project may produce
significant environmental effects
-determines extent of review for project
-check for impacts to 17 different types of environmental resources (Appendix G)
Bishop-Inyo Case - Answers - Citizens Association for Sensible Development of Bishop
Area vs. County of Inyo (1985)
-initial study must identify environmental effects using the checklist
-must also disclose the data or evidence upon which the person(s) conducting the study
relied
-no naked checklists
Negative Declaration (ND) - Answers - declaration documenting the decision not to
prepare an EIR; includes a brief project description and proposed findings of no
significant impact, attached to copy of Initial Study to justify the findings
-also includes project location and proponent
Goals of CEQA - Answers - 1) Identify environmental impacts
2) Inform decision-makers
3) Disclose to the public
4) Facilitate interagency
5) Enhance public participation
CEQA review - Answers - Subject:
1) Government activities that may have a physical impact on environment
2) Public projects
3) Private projects requiring discretionary public approval
Friends of Mammoth case (Friends of Mammoth v. Mono County Board of Supervisors,
1972) - Answers - court case finding that CEQA applies in instances in which state
regulates private activity (public discretionary approval)
-not just when government engages in development
lead agency - Answers - party responsible for ensuring the analysis is conducted
properly and using the review to inform decision-making
-private project: principal responsibility for approving project (ex. City Council)
-public projects: proposes project as well (ex. CA Dept. of Water Resources)
project proponent - Answers - party that is proposing the project
-private projects: developer or property owner
-public projects: government agency
responsible agency - Answers - any other agency that must give their approval for a
project to proceed
consultants - Answers - typically perform CEQA impact analysis
-costs paid by project proponents
trustee agency - Answers - several public agencies are given jurisdiction for natural
resources held in trust for people of CA
-if project potentially impacts one of these resources, the relevant trustee agency must
be consulted in impact assessment process
-either CA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife
-State Lands Commission
-CA Dept.. of Parks and Rec
-University of California
courts (role) - Answers - two primary roles
-settle lawsuits for individual projects
, -alter the interpretation and future application of CEQA
public (role) - Answers - public has privileged position under CEQA
-goal of CEQA is public disclosure
-entitled to public notifications and meetings, comment letters, ability to sue
threshold of significance - Answers - line between a significant and less than significant
impact
-CEQA does NOT specify what these should be
-vary on a case-by-case basis
significant impacts (degrees) - Answers - -significant impact
-unavoidable impact
-irreversible impact
CEQA guidelines - Answers - text of the law and standard operating procedures of
CEQA
-administered by the state Office of Planning and Research
categorical exemptions - Answers - classes of projects which typically do not have
significant impacts
-33 categories
-ex. repair/maintenance of existing structures, small projects (less than 10,000 square
feet), minor additions to schools
statutory exemptions - Answers - exemptions made by legislature, regardless of impacts
-these are policy decisions
-ex. family day care homes, 1984 LA Olympics, some mass transit projects, small infill &
affordable housing projects
initial study - Answers - preliminary assessment to determine if project may produce
significant environmental effects
-determines extent of review for project
-check for impacts to 17 different types of environmental resources (Appendix G)
Bishop-Inyo Case - Answers - Citizens Association for Sensible Development of Bishop
Area vs. County of Inyo (1985)
-initial study must identify environmental effects using the checklist
-must also disclose the data or evidence upon which the person(s) conducting the study
relied
-no naked checklists
Negative Declaration (ND) - Answers - declaration documenting the decision not to
prepare an EIR; includes a brief project description and proposed findings of no
significant impact, attached to copy of Initial Study to justify the findings
-also includes project location and proponent
