California Legal Brief

The Rule of Committee for Tiburon LLC v. Town of Tiburon is that a program EIR for a local agency's general plan need not include site-specific environmental analysis of sites identified in the housing element where no housing project has been proposed for the site, under circumstances where the absence of project-specific details precludes informed review of environmental impacts and mitigation measures.

Appeal from judgment after jury trial in Superior Court, Marin County.

Defendant Appellant was Town of Tiburon — the local government that prepared and certified a program-level EIR for its general plan update identifying 17 housing sites to meet regional housing needs.

Plaintiff Respondent was The Committee for Tiburon LLC — the entity challenging the adequacy of the EIR based on its failure to analyze site-specific environmental impacts of developing housing on "Site H."

The suit sounded in CEQA environmental review challenge. [No cross-claims described.]

The key substantive facts leading to the suit were the Town prepared and certified a program-level EIR for its general plan update to accommodate 639 units of projected regional housing needs. The plan identified 17 sites including "Site H" (over 9 acres, proposed to be rezoned from 7 units to 93 units capacity). No specific housing project had been proposed for Site H, but the Committee challenged the EIR's failure to conduct site-specific environmental analysis of potential impacts on Site H specifically.

The procedural result leading to the Appeal: The trial court granted the Committee's petition for writ of mandate, ruling that the EIR failed to include site-specific impacts of developing housing on Site H and that those impacts were reasonably foreseeable and feasible to analyze in the EIR.

The key question(s) on Appeal: If a local government is updating its general plan and housing element site inventory, and no specific housing project has been proposed for a listed site, must the EIR for the general plan analyze site-specific environmental impacts of potential development for that site?

The Appellate Court held that a program EIR for a general plan need not include site-specific environmental analysis of housing element sites where no housing project has been proposed, because the absence of project-specific details precludes meaningful review of environmental impacts and mitigation measures, and deferral of such analysis to project-level EIR is appropriate. The Housing Element Law requires only that local governments identify sites with realistic development potential, not that they build housing or commit to specific projects.

The case is inapplicable when a specific housing project has actually been proposed for a site in the housing element, when the local government has made a commitment to develop a specific project, or when sufficient project-specific details exist to allow meaningful analysis of environmental impacts and mitigation measures.

The case leaves open whether recent CEQA amendments exempting housing element rezoning apply to this case, whether Site H rezoning falls within exceptions to the exemption for construction within natural and protected lands, and whether the general plan is internally consistent and compatible.