City of Carmel-by-the-Sea v. Board of Supervisors (1986)

In City of Carmel-by-the-Sea v. Board of Supervisors (1986) 183 Cal.App.3d 229, 241, the court concluded that the rezoning of a particular area was a "project" that required the preparation of an EIR, and that the county erred in issuing a negative declaration. In that case, the rezoning was the first part of a larger development project; in fact, a development proposal was submitted to the county before the board of supervisors approved the rezoning. (Id. at pp. 243-244.) In City of Carmel-by-the-Sea v. Board of Supervisors, a developer sought to change the zoning for approximately 20 acres of land to enable a more expanded residential use of the property, but did not submit a development proposal with this rezoning request. (Id. at pp. 233-234.) The request was accompanied by a field study that proposed a boundary line for 4.68 acres of wetlands contained within the area. (Id. at p. 234.) After considerable public debate about this boundary line, the county planning commission adopted the developer's proposal and recommended to the county board of supervisors that a negative declaration, rather than an environmental impact report, would be appropriate because of the developer's intent to keep the existing land use. (Id. at pp. 234-235.) The board passed the rezoning ordinance without requiring an EIR, concluding it was not necessary in the absence of a proposed expanded use of the land, and because a later EIR would be required in connection with any such proposal. (Id. at pp. 232, 235.) The superior court granted the City of Carmel's subsequent petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the county to set this ordinance aside, from which the developer appealed. (Id. at pp. 232, 235.) The appellate court denied the appeal, agreeing with the City of Carmel's argument that the rezoning itself constituted a CEQA "project" that required preparation of an EIR, even if no actual development was being proposed. (Id. at pp. 241-243.) The court held that the rezoning proposal was "a necessary first step to approval of a specific development project" that "represented a commitment to expanded use of the property." (Id. at p. 244.)