AgdaPkt 2007-02-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

98 Page 2 Argument #1: Implementation of the Precise Plan will result in significant shadowing to Brewster A venue. Response: In this argument, the appellant claims that the Downtown Precise Plan will result in significant shadowing to the subject property (601 Brewster) and other properties along Brewster Avenue. The appellant also states that the City cannot dispute this claim because the City did not perform shadow studies for the Precise Plan. At issue with these claims is not whether new development under the Downtown Precise Plan will cast shadows, but whether those shadows are considered a significant impact under CEQA and whether the EIR should have included a shadow analysis to determine this significance. CEQA provides some guidance on this argument. The CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, CCR, Section 15000 et. seq) defines a significant effect on the environment as "a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic and aesthetic significance". (CCR 15382). In evaluating the significance of the environmental effect of a project, the lead agency shall consider "direct physical changes in the environment which may be caused by the project and reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment which may be caused by the project." (CCR 15064(d)). According to CEQA, "a direct physical change in the environment is a physical change which is caused by and immediately related to the project. Examples of direct physical changes are dust, noise, and traffic of heavy equipment that would result from construction of a sewage treatment plant and possible odors from operation of the plant..." (CCR 15064(d)(1). An "indirect physical change in the environment is a physical change which is not immediately related to the project, but which is caused indirectly by the project. If a direct physical change in turn causes another change in the environment, then the other change is an indirect physical change in the environment. For example, the construction of a new sewage treatment plant may facilitate population growth in the service area due to the increase in sewage treatment capacity and may lead to an increase in air pollution. (CCR 15064(d)(3)). An indirect physical change is to be considered only if that change is a reasonably foreseeable impact which may be caused by the project. A change which is speculative or unlikely to occur is not reasonably foreseeable. (CCR 15064(d)(3)). As a matter of law, CEOA does not require that any and all physical changes require study, but only substantial or potentially substantial adverse changes in physical conditions within the area affected by the project. As noted above, the general physical conditions that CEQA considers could be affected include land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. CEOA provides further guidance on factors to determine which effects may be considered significant in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the Environmental Checklist Form2. Most lead agencies in California, including Redwood City, rely on this checklist to assist them in making their own 2 The Environmental Checklist Form is a series of questions arranged by topic which help lead agencies determine whether a public or private development would have a significant environmental impact. 2