Court provides clarity on historical resource CEQA exemptions

A California appellate court on Oct. 6 published a favorable ruling on environmental review exemptions, meaning cities can now rely on the opinion as precedent. The move came at the urging of the League of the California Cities and the city of Glendale.

The case centered on Laguna Beach’s approval of a historic home remodel. The city found the project was exempt from the state’s environmental review process because it complied with federal standards for rehabilitating historic buildings.

The court did not publish the initial ruling in September, meaning it would have had no precedential effect on other cases.

Case history and outcome

Most projects that may cause a substantial, adverse change to the significance of a historical resource must undergo an environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, some projects are exempt from review, including “Class 31” projects. Such projects are focused on maintenance, restoration, or reconstruction. This exemption kicks in when a project meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

The local Historic Architecture Alliance sued Laguna Beach in 2021 for its approval of an addition to a historic, two-story home. The association alleged that the city’s finding that the project complied with federal standards was not sufficient for a Class 31 exemption. The association said it made a “fair argument” that the project would still result in a substantial, adverse change to the house. Therefore, the city needed to conduct an environmental review under CEQA.

The court disagreed and issued a ruling clarifying that when a project follows the Secretary’s standards, it necessarily has a “less than significant” effect on the historical resource. It is not enough for a challenger to make a “fair argument” that the project will result in a substantial, adverse change. Rather, the Class 31 exemption applies so long as substantial evidence supports the city’s determination that the project meets the Secretary’s standards, which the court found it did in this case. 

Gillian Van Muyden (Glendale City Attorney’s Office) drafted the request for publication for Historic Architecture Alliance v. City of Laguna Beach. This article is for general informational purposes only. Cities with questions about the specific impact of this ruling on their city should consult their city attorney.