Design Review Permit 25-02 for the Meadows at Bailey Canyon Project
7 Documents in Project
Summary
SCH Number
2020060534
Public Agency
City of Sierra Madre
Document Title
Design Review Permit 25-02 for the Meadows at Bailey Canyon Project
Document Type
NOE - Notice of Exemption
Received
Posted
2/27/2026
Document Description
The proposed project consists of a design review permit (DRP 25-02) for the implementation of The Meadows at Bailey Canyon Specific Plan: allowing the construction of 42 single-family dwellings (Lots 1-42), landscaping buffers in six (6) open space lots (Lots A-F), and one (1) open space park area (Lot 43). On January 29, 2026, an appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision approving DRP 25-02 was filed. On February 24, 2026, the City Council conducted a public hearing de novo for the appeal and decided to approve DRP 25-02.
Contact Information
Name
Joshua Wolf
Agency Name
City of Sierra Madre
Job Title
Senior Planner
Contact Types
Lead/Public Agency
Phone
Email
Name
Ani Schlah
Agency Name
Toll Brothers Inc.
Job Title
Sr. Project Manager
Contact Types
Project Applicant
Phone
Email
Location
Coordinates
Cities
Sierra Madre
Counties
Los Angeles
Regions
Citywide
Cross Streets
North Sunnyside Avenue and West Carter Avenue
Zip
91024
Total Acres
17.3
Parcel #
5761-002-009
State Highways
Interstate 210
Schools
Alverno Heights Academy, La Salle High School
Notice of Exemption
Exempt Status
Statutory Exemption
Type, Section or Code
Section 15182, Projects Pursuant to a Specific Plan
Reasons for Exemption
The proposed project is statutorily exempt from environmental review, pursuant to Section 15182(c) Residential Projects Implementing Specific Plans of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Where a public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific plan after January 1, 1980, a residential project undertaken pursuant to and in conformity to that specific plan is exempt from CEQA if the project meets the requirements of this section. The Project including residential planned unit developments that are undertaken consistent with the Specific Plan are exempt from CEQA, regardless of their location. However, the exemption requires review to ensure that the project would not create any new impacts or increase the severity of impacts previously disclosed in the original environmental document, as described in Guidelines §15162. On September 27, 2022, the City Council certified the EIR for the Project. The Planning Commission exempted the Project from further CEQA review under 14 CCR 15182(c), as a residential project implementing a specific plan that was approved alongside a certified EIR. The appellant’s grounds for appeal do not articulate some substantial change or new information that would have triggered a Subsequent EIR or Supplemental EIR.There are no “substantial changes … with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR … due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.” (14 CCR 15162(a)(2).) The facts remain the same. The subject parcel was an unimproved site and remains an unimproved site. There were no structures that burnt on site as a result of the Eaton Fire that create a presumption of soil contamination. The certified EIR never considered the soil contaminants that were recently tested as part of the soil management plan. The Project will not have one or more significant effects not discussed in the certified EIR because the soil remediation is complete. The contaminants have already been mitigated.Section 4.10 of the certified EIR analyzed the impacts of hydrology and water quality. The applicant’s appeal does not articulate, and City staff is not aware of any substantial change or new information that undermines the analysis in the certified EIR. Section 4.20 of the certified EIR analyzed the impacts of wildfire. The applicant’s appeal does not articulate, and City staff is not aware of any substantial change or new information that undermines the analysis in the certified EIR. While no California case directly addresses wildfires as changed circumstances requiring a Supplemental EIR or Subsequent EIR, federal precedent provides guidance. In Laguna Greenbelt, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Transportation (9th Cir. 1994) 42 F.3d 517, an agency's decision not to supplement an Environmental Impact Statement under the National Environmental Pollution Act after wildfires was upheld because the initial environmental impact statement had taken into account the effects of the natural fires in the area.
County Clerk
Los Angeles
Attachments
Notice of Exemption
Disclaimer: The Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (LCI) accepts no responsibility for the content or accessibility of these documents. To obtain an attachment in a different format, please contact the lead agency at the contact information listed above. For more information, please visit LCI’s Accessibility Site.