Cal. Codes » Public Resources Code / DIVISION 13. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY / CHAPTER 1. Policy
California Codes

Cal. Public Resources Code § 21002 (2026)

Policy

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects. The Legislature further finds and declares that in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2023 · leading case: State Water Resources Control Bd. Cases, 36 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20038 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Water Resources Control Bd. Cases, 36 Envtl. L. Rep. (Envtl. Law Inst.) 20038 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). “[][] “For each significant effect, the EIR must identify specific mitigation measures; where several potential mitigation measures are available, each should be discussed separately, and the reasons for choosing one over the others should be stated.”
Sacramento Old City Ass'n v. City Council of Sacramento, 229 Cal. App. 3d 1011 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “*1027 Public Resources Code section 21002 requires agencies to adopt feasible mitigation measures to substantially lessen or avoid otherwise significant adverse environmental impacts.”
Napa Citizens for Honest Gov't v. Napa Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 110 Cal. Rptr. 2d 579 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). “” Public Resources Code section 21002, and CEQA Guidelines section 15093, subdivisions (a) and (b), permit an agency to approve a project even though it will have significant impacts on the environment that cannot be fully mitigated, but only if the agency finds that specific…”
Kings Cnty. Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford, 221 Cal. App. 3d 692 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990). “Public Resources Code section 21002 provides in part: “The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would…”
Twain Harte Homeowners Ass'n v. Cnty. of Tuolumne, 138 Cal. App. 3d 664 (Cal. Ct. App. 1982). “Public Resources Code section 21002 provides as follows: “The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would…”
Pesticide Action Network N. Am. v. Cal. Dep't of Pesticide Reg., 224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 591 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2017). “available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental impacts of such projects, and that the procedures required by this division are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying .”
Stevens v. City of Glendale, 125 Cal. App. 3d 986 (Cal. Ct. App. 1981). “Public Resources Code section 21002 provides: “The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would…”
Prentiss v. City of South Pasadena, 15 Cal. App. 4th 85 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993). “2 Public Resources Code section 21002 provides: “The Legislature finds and declares that it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would…”
L.A. Waterkeeper v. State Water Resources Control Bd., 92 Cal. App. 5th 230 (Cal. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “Thus, Public Resources Code section 21002’s policy guidance has force only to the extent an entity otherwise is obligated to comply with CEQA’s environmental review requirements.”
Pesticide Action Network etc. v. Cal. Dept. of Pesticide Reg. (Cal. Ct. App. 2017). “) Public Resources Code section 21002 states that “it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives .”
Pesticide Action Network etc. v. Cal. Dept. of Pesticide Reg. (Cal. Ct. App. 2017). “) Public Resources Code section 21002 states that “it is the policy of the state that public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.