Article 2.1 — General Provisions

The provisions of this part shall be known as the California Environmental Quality Act procedures, and may be referred to as the city CEQA procedures. The purpose of these provisions is to provide a basis for implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by the city as directed by Section 15022 et seq. of the State CEQA Guidelines. These provisions shall apply to all projects sponsored by the city or Redevelopment Agency, and to all private projects requiring any discretionary approvals from the city.

(Ord. 11766 § 2 (part), 1994: prior planning code § 1100)

CEQA obliges every public agency and every citizen to take all action necessary to protect, rehabilitate and enhance the environment of California. Major consideration shall be given by the city to prevent environmental damage, both in making decisions on city projects and in regulating the activities of private individuals and corporations. The Oakland Policy Plan, a component of the Oakland Comprehensive Plan, contains three goals that relate to the purpose of these procedures: (1) To protect and improve Oakland's physical environment; (2) To conserve with care the open space and natural resources which will be needed by present and future generations; and (3) To recognize natural environmental hazards in planning for the city's future development. It is the policy of the city that consideration of environmental effects shall be incorporated into project conceptualization, design and planning at the earliest feasible time.

(Ord. 11766 § 2 (part), 1994: prior planning code § 1110)

The Guidelines for implementation of CEQA as described in Section 15000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations shall be followed by the city and are incorporated by reference into these procedures. Incorporation by reference shall include any revisions or amendments to CEQA or the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 15022 of said Guidelines requires cities to provide additional directions and information and these are provided in these environmental review regulations. Where a conflict between the Guidelines and these environmental review regulations exist, the Guidelines shall prevail.

(Ord. 11766 § 2 (part), 1994: prior planning code § 1120)

Projects requiring only ministerial approvals are not subject to environmental review under CEQA, pursuant to Section 21080(b)(1) of CEQA and Section 15268 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Projects requiring any discretionary approvals may be subject to environmental review under CEQA unless otherwise exempt, pursuant to Section 21080(a) of CEQA, and Section 15002(i) of the State CEQA Guidelines. See also Sections 17.158.180 and 17.158.190 of these environmental review regulations.

(Ord. 11766 § 2 (part), 1994: prior planning code § 1130)

Ministerial actions typically processed by the City include, but are not limited to:

A.

Issuance of building, plumbing, mechanical, and electrical permits;

B.

Issuance of sign and banner permits;

C.

Issuance of sewer permits;

D.

Issuance of sidewalk, driveway, curb, and gutter permits;

E.

Issuance of ministerial demolition permits, as defined in Chapter 15.36 of the Oakland Municipal Code, except where either the demolition or replacement project requires any discretionary approvals, pursuant to Title 17 of the Oakland Planning Code;

F.

Issuance of reroofing permits;

G.

Issuance of pest control permits;

H.

Approval of individual utility service connections or disconnections;

I.

Approval of final subdivision maps;

J.

Approval of parcel map waivers, including lot line adjustments and lot combinations;

K.

Approval of design review exemptions, as defined in Chapter 17.136 of the Oakland Planning Code;

L.

Issuance of business licenses and payment of business taxes;

M.

Granting of permits by the Police and Fire Departments.

(Ord. No. 13596, § 2(Exh. A), 6-2-2020; Ord. No. 13064, § 2(Exh. A), 3-15-2011; Ord. 12872 § 4 (part), 2008; Ord. 12776 § 3, Exh. A (part), 2006: Ord. 11766 § 2 (part), 1994: prior planning code § 1140)

Discretionary actions typically processed by the City include, but are not limited to:

A.

Certain approvals granted under the zoning regulations, including but not limited to:

Conditional Use Permits;

Small Project Design Review, as defined in Chapter 17.136 of the Oakland Planning Code;

Special Project Design Review, as defined in Chapter 17.136 of the Oakland Planning Code;

Regular Design Review, as defined in Chapter 17.136 of the Oakland Planning Code;

Development Agreements;

Planned Unit Developments;

Rezonings;

Variances.

B.

Certain approvals granted under the subdivision regulations, including but not limited to:

Private access easements;

Tentative parcel maps;

Tentative tract maps.

C.

Certain permits issued under other City codes, regulations, and ordinances, including but not limited to:

Discretionary demolition permits, as defined in Chapter 15.36 of the Oakland Municipal Code, and as related to any demolition or removal of structures on a site where the zoning regulations requires design review to alter the exterior appearance of the applicable building facility, regardless of whether the owner intends to create a surface parking lot or a vacant lot pursuant to Section 15.36.080;

Encroachment permits;

Excavation permits;

Grading permits;

House moving permits;

Obstruction permits;

Permits for private construction of public improvements ("P-job" permits);

Special activity permits issued by the City Administrator;

Tree removal permits.

D.

Amendments to the zoning regulations, subdivision regulations, other codes and regulations governing the issuance of discretionary permits, or the Oakland General Plan.

E.

Projects sponsored or assisted by the City or the Redevelopment Agency.

(Ord. No. 13596, § 2(Exh. A), 6-2-2020; Ord. No. 13172, § 3(Exh. A), 7-2-2013; Ord. No. 13064, § 2(Exh. A), 3-15-2011; Ord. 12872 § 4 (part), 2008; Ord. 12776 § 3, Exh. A (part), 2006: Ord. 11766 § 2 (part), 1994: prior planning code § 1150)

The City Planning Commission or other appropriate decision-making body shall not approve a project for which the environmental review process is required without following the procedures outlined below.

A.

Exempt Projects. If the project is exempt, some finding to this effect shall be included in the record. If action is by resolution, the resolution will typically contain a clause declaring that the project is exempt from the requirements of CEQA.

B.

Negative Declarations. If a negative declaration has been prepared, the decision-making body shall review this document and approve the negative declaration concurrently in approving the project's discretionary permit application. After making a decision, the decision-making body or its agent shall notify the Environmental Review Officer, to cause a Notice of Determination (NOD) to be filed with the County Clerk. If the project requires discretionary approval from any State agency, the Environmental Review Officer shall also cause the notice of determination to be filed with the State Office of Planning and Research. The filing of the notice of determination is a mandatory requirement under CEQA Guidelines Section 15075.

The NOD shall include the following information:

A project identification including its common name and its location;

A brief description of the project;

The date of project approval;

A statement of determination that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment;

A statement that a negative declaration or an environmental impact report has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA;

The address and location where a copy of the negative declaration may be examined.

C.

Environmental Impact Report (EIR). If an EIR has been prepared, the decision-making body shall certify the final EIR before approving the discretionary permits for the project. However, no project for which an EIR was completed and certified, and which identifies one or more significant environmental effects shall be approved without making one or more findings for each of the identified significant environmental effects. Such findings shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The following possible findings are identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15091:

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which would avoid or substantially lessen the identified significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR;

Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the City. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency;

Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

Should a finding be made that mitigation measures are not feasible, the decision-making body shall adopt a "statement of overriding consideration" as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15093.

If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the environmental effects may be considered acceptable. The decision-making body shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and/or information in the record. If a statement of overriding consideration is adopted, it should be identified in the notice of determination.

After making a decision, the decision-making body or its agents shall notify the Environmental Review Officer, who shall cause a Notice of Determination (NOD) to be filed with the County Clerk and if required, the State Office of Planning and Research.

(Ord. No. 13172, § 3(Exh. A), 7-2-2013; Ord. 11766 § 2 (part), 1994: prior planning code § 1160)

The Review Officer shall have authority to extend or waive time limits as provided in the Guidelines. Such action is appealable to the City Planning Commission within ten (10) days of the Review Officer's decision. The decision of the City Planning Commission is final. However, failure to adhere to the prescribed time limits, shall not in and of itself, prejudice the city from requiring appropriate environmental review.

A.

Review of Application for Completeness. At the time the city receives an application for a permit or other entitlement that requires discretionary review, the city will have thirty (30) days to review the application for completeness of required information for environmental determination. As noted in Section 15101 of the CEQA Guidelines, if no written determination of the completeness of the application is made within that period, the application will be deemed complete on the thirtieth day. The running of CEQA processing time periods should begin on the same date as the permit processing time limits.

B.

Initial Study. The Environmental Review Officer or his/her representative shall determine within thirty (30) days after receiving an application as complete whether the Environmental Review Officer will direct that a negative declaration or an EIR, or a previously prepared negative declaration or an EIR may serve as environmental documentation for the proposed project. The thirty (30) day time limit may be extended fifteen (15) days upon the consent of the Environmental Review Officer and the project sponsor (CEQA Guidelines Section 15102).

C.

Negative Declarations. The negative declaration must be completed within one hundred five (105) days from the date that the Environmental Review Officer or his/her representative has determined that the application is complete. CEQA Guidelines Section 15107 states that this statutory requirement applies to private sponsored projects only.

D.

Notice of Preparation. Upon completion of an initial study, and it is determined that an EIR is required, a notice of preparation shall be prepared. All responsible and trustee agencies, interested individuals and organizations shall have thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice to respond and comment on the scope of project environmental effects.

E.

Environmental Impact Report. With respect to private projects, the preparation and certification of the final EIR shall be completed within one-year of the date that an application is accepted as complete. Upon the mutual consent of both the Environmental Review Officer and the project sponsor, this one-year time limit may be extended once for a period of not more than ninety (90) days (CEQA Guidelines Section 15108).

F.

Projects Subject to CEQA and NEPA. If a project is subject to both CEQA and NEPA environmental processing, the one-year time limit for the preparation of an EIR, and the one hundred five (105) day time limit for a negative declaration may be waived under certain conditions as discussed in Section 15110 of the CEQA Guidelines. Specifically, this time limit waiver shall apply when additional time is needed to prepare a combined EIR/EIS or combined negative declaration/FONSI, and if the time to prepare the combined documents would be shorter than the time required to prepare the documents separately.

G.

Statute of Limitations. As stated in Section 15112 of the CEQA Guidelines, the statute of limitations for environmental documents are as follows:

(a)

Notice of exemption: thirty-five (35) days after the filing of the notice with the County Clerk.

(b)

Notice of determination: thirty (30) days after filing of the notice and the posting of the notice by the County Clerk, and/or the State Office of Planning and Research.

(c)

If neither a notice of exemption nor a notice of determination has been filed with the appropriate agency, the statute of limitations shall be for one hundred eighty (180) days after the decision-making body's decision on the proposed project.

The statute of limitations are not waiting periods for the project sponsor. Therefore, the project sponsor may proceed at their own risk of possible legal challenge, to carry out the project as soon as the necessary and required permits for the project have been granted by the appropriate permit-granting agencies.

H.

Suspension of Time Periods. As authorized by Section 15109 of the CEQA Guidelines, the Environmental Review Officer may suspend the running of the time period for the preparation of negative declarations and EIRs, if the Environmental Review Officer or his/her representative determines that the project sponsor has caused an unreasonable delay in meeting requests for information or collection of required fees.

In addition, the Planning Commission may disapprove a project application without prejudice, if there is an unreasonable delay in meeting requests for additional information or other indications of unresponsiveness that would affect the timely and expeditious preparation of the environmental documentation for the project.

The Environmental Review Officer will allow the project sponsor no more than three months to respond before a recommendation may be made to the City Planning Commission to disapprove the project without prejudice. Requests for information to the project sponsor or his/her representatives shall be made in written form, and at least one written notice sent by registered mail to the project sponsor shall be sent a minimum of two weeks before the three-month time limit ends, to allow the project sponsor time to respond. The Environmental Review Officer will allow a renewed application submitted with new fees, to start at the same point where the project was suspended or disapproved without prejudice provided the project description has not been substantially altered and will not increase the adverse environmental effects of the project as compared with the project that was disapproved without prejudice. If after a one- year period after the proposed project application has been denied without prejudice, and the project sponsor has not taken steps to re-initiate processing of the environmental documentation for the proposed project, the environmental review file will be closed permanently. Any subsequent resurrection of the proposed project will be treated as a new project and require submittal of a new application and collection of new fees.

(Ord. No. 13172, § 3(Exh. A), 7-2-2013; Ord. 11766 § 2 (part), 1994: prior planning code § 1170)

The following are administrative appeals or challenges of environmental determinations made by the Environmental Review Officer, or by his or her representative. Legal challenges to the adequacy of environmental determinations are described in Section 17.158.210G. Failure to administratively appeal may limit the issues that one may raise in another administrative level or in a legal challenge in a court of law. The process governing appeals/challenges is illustrated in Figure 1. However, this text takes precedence over the figure.

A.

Any determination of exemption, except those made by a final decision-making body, may be appealed in writing and with the appropriate fee according to the master fee schedule to the City Planning Commission, prior to the close of the public comment period on the underlying permits/decision. The determination of the City Planning Commission shall be final.

B.

Initial Study. The determination of the Environmental Review Officer may be appealed by the project sponsor, in writing and with the appropriate fee as found in the master fee schedule, within twenty-one (21) days from the day the project sponsor has been notified, to the Planning Commission, whose decision shall be final.

C.

Negative Declaration. The negative declaration notice shall invite written challenges to the finding of no significant effect. Such written challenges shall be submitted with the appropriate challenge fee, as shown on the current master fee schedule. The challenge shall run concurrently with the twenty-one (21) or thirty (30) day public review period for the negative declaration notification. The City Planning Commission shall consider any and all such challenges, and may reject them or may direct that an appropriate environmental document be prepared (e.g., environmental exemption, mitigated negative declaration, negative declaration, or environmental impact report). The City Planning Commission's decision shall be final.

D.

Determination of Need For an Environmental Impact Report. The Environmental Review Officer's determination that the preparation of an EIR is necessary may be appealed by the project sponsor, in writing and with the appropriate fee in the master fee schedule, within twenty-one (21) days of the project sponsor's receipt of this environmental determination. The City Planning Commission shall consider such appeal and may reject or direct that an appropriate environmental document be prepared. The City Planning Commission's decision shall be final.

E.

Notwithstanding any provisions to the contrary, although the environmental determination of the City Planning Commission is final, where another decision-making body must approve the project itself, that

decision-making body must make an environmental determination prior to taking action on the project.

F.

Certification of an Environmental Impact Report. The certification of the EIR by the City Planning Commission may be appealed in writing and with the appropriate fee as found in the master fee schedule, to the City Council within ten days from the City Planning Commission decision to certify the EIR. The City Council shall retain jurisdiction to determine whether the EIR shall be certified.

(Ord. 11766 § 2 (part), 1994: prior planning code §§ 1180—1186)