Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't think that is current law or jurisprudence. There is a bill introduced in this session that will make any project consequent to an adopted general, area, or specific plan be "not a project" under CEQA. But that's not where we are now, which is why cities have to EIR their general plans and then every project has another EIR.

Personally, I think they should just write down that anything inside the boundary of an incorporated city, built on a site that previously had something on it, is not a project.



Yes it is: private projects are only subject to CEQA if permits are discretionary cf https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=21723.

In San Francisco and some neighboring cities, every permit is discretionary either directly or through ambiguity (https://law.ucdavis.edu/sites/g/files/dgvnsk10866/files/medi...), but it doesn’t have to be that way.


Thanks. I was thinking about projects like UC housing. I believe the new bill is meant to exempt public agencies from this problem.


Yeah the UC has the great blessing of not being subject to local zoning and the great curse of being a public project subject to CEQA no matter what.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: