City of Camarillo CEQA Environmental Guidelines Update Planning Commission Meeting May 5, 2020
City of Camarillo Environmental Guidelines Update Intent Adopt revised Environmental Guidelines that will guide staff and the public • through the environmental process. Assist consultants working for the City in the consistent use of • methodologies and thresholds to evaluate project impacts. Make the CEQA review process more efficient for the City of Camarillo, the • public, and decision-makers. Obtain greater legal protection in the event that environmental documents • are challenged in court by adopting thresholds of significance. Produce a “living document” that can be easily updated as necessary to • address changes to the State CEQA Guidelines or changes to thresholds of significance by other applicable agencies. 2
City Environmental Guidelines Update Recap City staff meetings to identify thresholds of significance and obtain input. • City Council study session on October 10, 2018 directed staff to continue to • develop thresholds of significance for the updated guidelines. Additional City staff meetings to further identify and clarify thresholds of • significance and obtain additional input. City Council study session on December 11, 2019 to review proposed • thresholds of significance. City staff and consultant prepared a draft copy of the environmental • guidelines for presentation at a Community Workshop on March 3, 2020 City staff and consultant prepared a draft copy of the environmental • guidelines for presentation at a Planning Commission meeting on May 5, 2020 3
Environmental Determination The update to the City’s environmental guidelines is exempt from the California • Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the State CEQA Guidelines (Chapter 3 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations beginning at Section 15000), specifically: Section 15060(c)(2), because the proposed resolution will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment; and Section 15061(b)(3), because the ordinance is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Additionally, according to the California Supreme Court Case of California • Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management in 2015, an update to the City’s environmental guidelines involving thresholds of significance is not a “project” as defined by CEQA, because the environmental guidelines do not have an effect on the environment that is “direct” or “a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” (See Cal. Building Industry Assn. v Bay Area Quality Management District (62 Cal.4 th 369; see also Cal. Building Industry Assn. v Bay Area Quality Management District (2013) 161 Cal.Rptr.3d 128 (reversed on other grounds).) Furthermore, these guidelines only set forth the City’s guidelines for environmental review and any project reviewed under the updated City environmental guidelines will undergo its own environmental review. Therefore, no additional environmental review is necessary. 4
Additional Information The updated environmental guidelines, if adopted, will apply to projects filed • after the date of adoption of the guidelines. Environmental documents for projects that were filed prior to the adoption of the updated environmental guidelines are not subject to the environmental guidelines proposed within this update. Environmental documents circulated for public review prior to July 1, 2020 • are not be subject to the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis under CEQA. After July 1, 2020, a project cannot be evaluated for environmental impacts • based on Transportation Level of Service (LOS) analysis, however, LOS analysis can be evaluated and mitigated as a development impact. 5
State CEQA Environmental Factors ☐ ☐ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ☐ Aesthetics and Visual Resources Air Quality ☐ Cultural Resources and ☐ ☐ Biological Resources Energy Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ ☐ ☐ Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards and Hazardous Materials ☐ ☐ ☐ Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources ☐ ☐ ☐ Noise and Vibration Population and Housing Public Services and Recreation ☐ ☐ ☐ Recreation Transportation/Traffic Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ ☐ ☐ Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance Red Recent changes adopted by the State of California. Green Changes recommended by City staff for Camarillo. 6
Determination of Environmental Impacts Under CEQA, impacts are determined to be: No Impact : The project will result in no direct or indirect impact on the environment. Less Than Significant Impact : The project will result in a direct or indirect impact on the environment, but the impact is not substantially adverse. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated : The project will result in a potentially significant adverse impact, but a mitigation measure is identified to reduce the impact to a less than significant level. Potentially Significant Impact : The project will result in a direct or indirect impact on the environment and the impact may be substantially adverse or information is not known at the time to determine whether the impact would not be substantially adverse. 7
1. Aesthetics and Visual Resources Environmental Issue/ Significance Criteria Thresholds of Significance Would the project: No Impact . The project site is not located adjacent to an established City scenic corridor. Less Than Significant Impact . The project site is located adjacent an established City scenic corridor, but the project does not eliminate the permanent view from the scenic corridor of historic a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic sites or large areas designated for agriculture, open space, or waterways. vista that is visible from a City scenic corridor? Potentially Significant Impact . The project site is located adjacent an established City scenic corridor and the project eliminates the permanent view from the scenic corridor of historic sites or large areas designated for agriculture, open space, or waterways. No Impact . The project site is not located adjacent to an established City scenic corridor. b. Substantially damage scenic resources, Less Than Significant Impact . The project site is located adjacent an established City scenic including, but not limited to, trees, rock corridor, but the project does not change to urban uses in areas designated for agriculture, open outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state space, historic sites, or waterways. scenic highway? Substantially alter or damage a Potentially Significant Impact . The project site is located adjacent an established City scenic scenic resource that is visible from a City scenic corridor and the project changes to urban uses in areas designated for agriculture, open space, corridor? historic sites, or waterways. 8
1. Aesthetics and Visual Resources (continued) Environmental Issue/ Significance Criteria Thresholds of Significance Would the project: No Impact . The project does not involve a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. c. In non-urbanized area, substantially degrade the Less Than Significant Impact . The project will be consistent with Open Space and Conservation existing visual character or quality of pubic views Element Policy 6, Policy 7, and Policy 8, and Community Design Element policies CD-1.2.1, CD- of the site and its surroundings? If he project is in 1.2.1, CD-1.2.3, CD-1.3.1, CD-1.4.1, CD-1.4.2, RA-1.5.1, RA-1.7.3, RA-1.7.4, RA-2.1.2, CA-1.1.1, an urbanized area, would the project conflict with PQPF-1.1.1, GSC-1.1.1, GSC-1.1.2, GSC-1.1.3, SC-1.1.2, SC-1.1.3, SC-1.1.4, SC-1.2.1, SC- applicable zoning and other regulations governing 1.2.2, SC-1.2.3, SC-1.2.4, and S-2.4, as applicable to the project. scenic quality? Conflict with applicable General Potentially Significant Impact . The project will be inconsistent with Open Space and Plan policies or zoning regulations governing Conservation Element Policy 6, Policy 7, and Policy 8, and Community Design Element policies scenic quality? CD-1.2.1, CD-1.2.1, CD-1.2.3, CD-1.3.1, CD-1.4.1, CD-1.4.2, RA-1.5.1, RA-1.7.3, RA-1.7.4, RA- 2.1.2, CA-1.1.1, PQPF-1.1.1, GSC-1.1.1, GSC-1.1.2, GSC-1.1.3, SC-1.1.2, SC-1.1.3, SC-1.1.4, SC-1.2.1, SC-1.2.2, SC-1.2.3, SC-1.2.4, and/or S-2.4, as applicable to the project. No Impact . The project will not create any new source of light or glare. d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare Less Than Significant Impact . The project will comply with all applicable City standards for which would adversely affect day or nighttime building materials and lighting. views in the area? Potentially Significant Impact . The project will be inconsistent with one or more applicable City standards for building materials and lighting. 9
Recommend
More recommend
