Laserfiche WebLink
May 19, 2021 <br />Page 27 <br /> <br /> <br />5005-004acp <br /> <br /> printed on recycled paper <br />with CEQA and mandamus statutory requirements which provide that agencies <br />and the recipients of project approvals may not recover their attorneys fees from <br />petitioners in lawsuits challenging the agency’s approval of a project pursuant to <br />CEQA, State land use and planning, or other environmental laws. <br /> <br />The threat of substantial monetary obligations on appellants would place too <br />great a burden on the exercise of a due process right to a hearing that is required <br />under CEQA in order to access the courts. Any attempt by the City to collect the <br />costs identified on page 2 of the Form from Residents or other appellants would <br />therefore constitute a due process violation. <br /> <br />V. CONCLUSION <br /> <br />The City cannot rely on the Infill Exemption for all the reasons stated in East <br />Bay Residents May 6, 2021 Comments and herein including, but not limited to, <br />unmitigated air quality, health risk, hazardous materials, greenhouse gas <br />emissions, noise, traffic, and housing. The City must prepare an Infill EIR before <br />the Project can be approved because the Project would result in new specific effects <br />and more significant effects to air quality, health risk, hazardous materials, <br />greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and traffic; and uniformly applicable development <br />standards would not substantially mitigate such effects.116 <br /> <br />Thank you for your consideration of these comments. <br /> <br /> Sincerely, <br /> Kelilah D. Federman <br /> Associate Attorney <br /> <br />KDF:acp <br />Attachment <br /> <br />116 CEQA Guidelines § 15183.3(d)(2)(C). <br />86