AgdaPkt 2012-02-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8. B. - Page 18 Maureen Rioxdan Octaber 26, 20I1 Page 3 significai�t e��virorz�ental ef��cts of a projec�.� C�QA requires tha� an ag�ncy �na�yze po�ential�y 5�gnificant �nvironmer�tal iznpacts in �n EIR. The EIR should t7€�t rely an sci��t�fically outdated info�z�ation to ass�ss the signifzcaz�ce of i�npacts. The EI�,'s ev�luation of impacts should be based on "e�tensive research and infarrnation gather.ing," including consultation wi�h Sf,�te and federa� agencies, IocaZ officials and the z�terested public. To be adeq�ate, the FIR should demons�rate the lead agency's good faith e££ort at full disclosuie.� Its purpose is to in�'orm �he pubJic and responsible o�'�icials of the environmentaJ. cansequences of their d�cisic�ns befor�� they are xnade. For this reason, tl�� E�R has be�n descri�ed. as "an envircan.mental `alarrn bell' whc�se purpose is to alert the public and i�s respansibl� afificials to �nvironmental ehanges be�o�e �hey have reached ecological points of �a r��u�n. "Thus, �he �IH, pra�ects not c�n1� tne en�ri.io�x�e��, b�t a1sc� info�med. s�J£-gove�°n�nen�." f S�cond, CEQA diree#;s p��lic agencies �c� avr�id or reduce enviza:��en�al damage when posszble hy req�zilin� a�te��atives c�r mitig�tion measu��s.& The FIP, serves to pravzde publie ag�ncies, and the public in gen�ral, �x�ith information about th� �ffect tha� a propos�d ��ajec� is �il��ly t have an the envi�°onm�nt and �o "identify vvays that envirars.�nen�al c�amage can be avaic��d oi sig�lificantJ.y reduced."� I£ a praject has a sig�ni�icant effect or� tl�e �nviron�nent, the agency may approve tk�e project only upan a f��dzng that it has "elirni�ated or substan�iallST lessened all significant ef�'�cts on the enviioa�men.t v��h�;re �easible," and �ha� any unavoidabie significant e�'f�c�s on the environment are "acceptable due �o averrzding conceri specified in CEC�A Guid�Iines section 1�093.� The DEIR fails to satisf�� hese basic purpo,s�s of CEQA. Specifically, the D�:�R doas nat re�l�ct a good faith effart at p�blic disclasur�. The DEI�, �'aiis �a '- Cal. Code Regs., t'€t 1�4, ,y� t.SO(}2 subd. (a)(1) (he�•eafi�er CEQA Guidelines). ' See Pu.b. Resources Code, � 27.D(30; CEQA C:uidelines, §§ �5002, subd. (fl, 15126.2, su.bd. (a). 4 Schraeffer• l;and "Ir°ust v. Sar� Jase City Coz�ncrl (1989) 215 EaLA.pp.3d G12, �'?0 {cifations o�nitted); see alsa Berkeley Keep Jets O��er 1h�e �ay Cnna. u. Bd. of Por°t Comrs. o�th�e City af Oakla��ar�{200I ) 9] Cai.App.4tih 1344, 1367 (hereafter Berkeley Keep Jets �ner !he 8a�y}. 5 CEQA Gtridelines, § 15151; s�e also Laul�el Heights In�provement �#ssn. of Sarz F�rancisco v Regei�ts of fhe L'. o�' Cal. (] 988) 47 Ca1.3d 37fi, 406-07 (herea��er Gcair�•el I�eigJzts h�zprnvement �ssn.}. � C.'ou�aly qflnyo ��. �'orty (1973) 32 CaI.A�p.3c� 7�5, 8I0. � Citiaen,s of Goleta �a11ey v. Bd. of,Szrperviso�•.r (1990) �2 Ca1.3� 553, 5b4 (citati�ns oi�aitted). a CEQA Guideli��e.s, § 15002, subd. (a)(2)-(3); Ber]cele,7� Keep Jets Over° tlxe Bay Com., supra, 91 Cal:l��p.4th at p. 1354. 9 C�QA Guidelines, § 150(}2 subd. (a}(2}. ' CEQA Guidelines, § i5(�92, su6d. (1�}(2}(A}-(�). 25es.008�