Use of Project-Specific Significance Thresholds Does Not Violate CEQA
The first published California Environmental Quality Act case of 2013, Save Cuyama Valley v. County of Santa Barbara, strongly endorsed a lead agency's authority to use its own, project-specific significance thresholds in an environmental impact report. In addition, the court upheld the county's project approval despite finding that one of the EIR's environmental impact findings was erroneous. The county prepared the EIR for a proposal to mine sand and gravel in the bed of the Cuyama River. It used a significance threshold for river bed and bank impacts, that the county had crafted specifically for the project. In upholding this project-specific significance standard, the court emphasized:
- CEQA gives lead agencies discretion to develop their own thresholds of significance
- Agencies may devise significance thresholds on a project-by-project basis
- CEQA requires that a lead agency formally adopt a threshold of significance only if it is for "general use" in evaluating future projects
- The significance thresholds listed in Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines are only "suggested" and an EIR need not explain why different thresholds are used
Print and share
Authors
California Land Use & Development Law Report
California Land Use & Development Law Report offers insights into legal issues relating to development and use of land and federal, state and local permitting and approval processes. Subscribe 🡢