In a series of decisions that had agency planners and environmental consultants scratching their heads, various courts of appeal last year held that every CEQA document must take account of existing conditions in assessing environmental impacts. (See Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Assoc. v. City of Sunnyvale City Council (6th Dist. 2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 1351; Pfeiffer v. City of Sunnyvale City Council (6th Dist. 2011) 100 Cal.App.4th 1552; Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v. County of Madera (5th Dist. 2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 48; see also “CEQA Baselines: New Sunnyvale Case Sanctions EIR’s Use of Multiple Traffic Baselines,” by Arthur F. Coon, posted December 9, 2011.) These decisions meant agencies and private applicants had to incur the expense associated with additional studies and model runs, even where a project’s “opening day” would not occur for years. And further, while these decisions specifically concerned traffic studies, in light of their reasoning a prudent applicant would conduct existing baseline model runs for other impact areas such as noise and air quality. Costs for such studies easily ran into the five figures.
A recent decision by the Second District Court of Appeal runs counter to these holdings, declaring that, in certain circumstances, one can rely solely on future projected baselines.
In Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition...
