Insights
Publications

Alert: OPR Sends Proposed CEQA Guideline Amendments to Resources Agency

4/20/2009 Articles

On Monday April 13, 2009 the Governor's Office of Planning and Research ("OPR") released its proposed amendments to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines in order to address the potential effects of Greenhouse Gas ("GHG") emissions.  Pursuant to the legislative requirements, these Proposed Amendments have been sent to the Natural Resources Agency for review and final approval by January 1, 2010. 

This newly released proposal follows a lengthy review process by OPR that started after the legislature amended CEQA in late 2007 to require the agencies to draft guidelines for the mitigation of GHG emissions.  OPR first issued a Technical Advisory last summer which provided agencies with some preliminary guidance on how to address GHG emissions in CEQA documents.  After receiving substantial public comment the agency released a preliminary draft in January of this year and held a number of public hearings to take input on that draft.  The Proposed Amendments have been altered somewhat from the preliminary draft as a result of those comments.

As a whole, the Proposed Amendments do not significantly alter the traditional methods utilized under CEQA to determine the impacts of a project.  The changes emphasize that the same processes apply to the consideration of GHGs but the Amendments add some specific guidance on approaches that recognize the more global nature of GHG emissions.  For example, in determining the significance of impacts from GHGs the Proposed Amendments require the agency to quantify the emissions from the project, and evaluate whether the project's emissions will be greater than the existing environmental setting, whether it will exceed any significance threshold adopted by the public agency, and whether it complies with any regulations or requirements adopted by state, regional or local plans to reduce GHGs.  Although the California Air Resources Board is developing a recommended approach to setting thresholds of significance from GHG emissions, it is still the local agencies' decision whether and what threshold to adopt and the Proposed Amendments only add that a lead agency may consider thresholds previously adopted by other public agencies so long as they are supported by substantial evidence. 

Similarly, the Proposed Amendments emphasize that, consistent with the existing requirement that project impacts be mitigated, impacts from GHGs must be mitigated if feasible and it provides a list of possible measures that could be adopted such as on-site reductions, offsets and even sequestration of carbon.  It also considers incorporation of specific measures or policies in a previously adopted ordinance or regulation as acceptable mitigation. 

Along with new language in various sections which allow for the reliance on other statewide, regional or local plans relating to GHG emissions, the Proposed Amendments add an entire section on "Tiering and Streamlining the Analysis of GHG Emissions" to further enable agencies to manage the effects of GHGs at a programmatic level.  Many believe that a project-specific approach to managing GHGs will not be effective and these provisions should aid agencies seeking to manage the emissions at a broader level.  The section includes a reference to the possible CEQA exemptions and streamlining provisions set out in Senate Bill 375. 

The most significant alteration between the preliminary draft and the Proposed Amendments, an item of particular interest to infill developers, is the change to the transportation and traffic questions in Appendix G (the "Initial Study Checklist").  The preliminary draft had proposed completely eliminating the question about whether the project would cause an intersection or roadway to exceed the Level of Service ("LOS") standard established by the local agency.  This standard has often been extremely problematic for those seeking to create denser developments and many hoped a change would ease the approval process for infill projects.  The Proposed Amendments, however, back-off this approach and instead simply amend the question so that it now asks more generally whether the project will conflict with an applicable "congestion management program" which may include an LOS analysis or other travel demand standards.  This was important to local agencies who heavily rely on the LOS analysis in their planning process.  The section also now adds the consideration of more than just vehicular traffic by including impacts on "intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit."

There will be further opportunity to comment on the Proposed Amendments as the Resource Agency begins the formal rulemaking process.

Related Articles:

OPR Releases Draft Amendments to CEQA Guidelines to Incorporate Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

CARB Releases Preliminary Draft of Recommended Approaches for Setting Significance Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases under CEQA

Office of Planning and Research Releases Technical Advisory on CEQA and Climate Change


Farella Braun + Martel assists clients in getting speedy and appropriate CEQA review of their projects and is closely monitoring the manner in which new climate change-related statutes and regulations, such as AB 32 and SB 375, will impact project development.   For more information, please contact Steve Vettel at 415.954.4400.

Firm Highlights

Publication

California's Changing Approach to Housing Policy

Hardly a day goes by without news headlines reminding us that California is in the midst of a severe housing crisis. As with any crisis situation, questions abound. How did we get here? How...

Read More
Publication

Changing Climate, Changing Laws: Addressing CEQA’s New Wildfire Risk Requirements in Project Development

Wildfires pose an increasingly serious threat to the public and environment in California. So it should be no surprise that the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) amended Appendix G of California Environmental...

Read More
Publication

Attorney General Finds Impact Fees on Density Bonus Projects Invalid

In response to questions from a variety of cities across the state regarding the application of “public benefit fees” to density bonus projects, the State Attorney General’s Office published an opinion on April 9...

Read More
Publication

The Uncertain Future of California’s Vehicle Emission Standards

Read More
Publication

San Francisco COPA Program Rules Released

The Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) released program rules for the Community to Purchase Act (COPA) on September 3, 2019. The recently enacted COPA program (codified in Chapter 41B of the...

Read More
Publication

California Legislators Tackle Affordable Housing with Flurry of Proposed Bills

The California legislative session is currently underway, and several bills related to housing creation are being considered through the committee hearing process. Legislators representing San Francisco and other Bay Area cities and counties have...

Read More
Publication

Keeping Tabs on Energy Efficiency – New Benchmarking Requirements for San Francisco

Read More
Publication

How Napa County Seeks to Streamline the Winery Permit Process

Recently, local members of the wine industry in Napa County have been actively engaged with county government in discussions regarding ways to streamline the winery use permit process. Frustrated with the cost and lengthy...

Read More
Publication

A Watershed Moment for Renter Protections

It is tough to recognize when a watershed moment has occurred while one is in "the moment," but it won't take long for many to recognize that California is currently in the midst of one...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Attorneys Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America© 2020

Read More