Laserfiche WebLink
February 4, 2025 <br />Page 8 <br /> <br />7357-016j <br /> <br />No such right exists upon issuance of a final EID unless the project is <br />substantially modified, or new information becomes available.34 <br /> <br />In Laurel Heights the Supreme Court explained that Section 21092.1 favors <br />EIR recirculation prior to certification. The Court stated: <br /> <br />Section 21092.1 was intended to encourage meaningful public comment. (See <br />State Bar Rep., supra, at p. 28.) Therefore, new information that <br />demonstrates that an EIR commented upon by the public was so <br />fundamentally and basically inadequate or conclusory in nature that public <br />comment was in effect meaningless triggers recirculation under section <br />21092.1. (See, Mountain Lion Coalition v. Fish & Game Com., supra, 214 <br />Cal.App.3d 1043.)35 <br /> <br />Here, the DEIR for the Arroyo Lago Project analyzed a fundamentally <br />different project than the version of the Project currently proposed for annexation <br />and entitlement by the City. These changes in the Arroyo Lago Project require a <br />revised DEIR. As explained in EBRRD’s DEIR comments, the County’s DEIR also <br />impermissibly piecemealed its analysis of the Projects by omitting the East Lakes <br />Project from the DEIR. The Applicants’ concurrent proposals for annexation and <br />City approval of both Projects further demonstrates their interrelationship as part <br />of a single development proposal which must be analyzed in a single EIR. Due to <br />these major omissions in the County’s DEIR, the public was denied an opportunity <br />to meaningfully review and comment on the Projects. The City must prepare a new <br />DEIR, or revise and recirculate the Arroyo Lago DEIR, to comply with CEQA and <br />analyze these changes to the Projects in a single CEQA document. <br /> <br />As demonstrated in East Bay Resident’s comments on the DEIR, the <br />concurrent development of the Projects also results in significant, unmitigated <br />environmental effects with respect to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, <br />hazards, cumulative impacts, and land use impacts which the DEIR did not <br />adequately analyze or mitigate. These impacts must be analyzed and mitigated in a <br />revised DEIR before the Projects can proceed with the annexation City entitlement <br />processes. <br /> <br /> <br />34 Mountain Lion Coal. v. Fish & Game Com., 214 Cal. App. 3d 1043, 1052. (EID is essentially the <br />same as an EIR since the Dept. of Fish and Game had a certified environmental program). <br />35 Laurel Heights Impr. Assn. v. Reg. of Univ. of Cal . (1993) 6 Cal. 4th 1112. 1130.