City’s CEQA criteria to be critiqued

City officials are moving to update the city’s policies and procedures related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The Planning Commission created a subcommittee Aug. 16 to review a proposed update drafted by city planning staff.

Local procedures must be consistent with the state-adopted guidelines, which have been amended several times since the legislature enacted CEQA — Title 14 in the state code of regulations — in 1970.

“CEQA procedures and guidelines have been evolving since then,” said John Montgomery, director of the city’s Community Development Department. “It has been many years since local procedures were updated.”

Although the CEQA guidelines are a valuable resource, Montgomery said, review and possible revisions to the local document were not high on the city’s list of priorities until last fall.

“It is something I have always wanted to do, and the council has now directed us to make it a special project,” Montgomery said. “It is at the point for you [the commission] to review it and make recommendations.”

Commissioners Norm Grossman and Anne Johnson were appointed to a subcommittee to take on the task.

Montgomery said his draft closely follows, and often references, the state guidelines.

“Basically, it is a resource document for the staff and informs the public about the internal procedures used by staff in implementing CEQA,” Montgomery said.

The guidelines address how to determine exemptions from CEQA requirements; the preparation and review of an initial study, which decides whether a project requires an environmental report, the selection process for an environmental-report consultant and the review process for a report.

Also included are sections on definitions and documents related to time limits, a CEQA process flow chart, an initial environmental study check list and negative declaration form.

A negative declaration states that the project will cause no significant damage to the environment.

A “mitigated negative declaration” is issued for projects that can cause significant damage but which can be reduced to acceptable levels. Governing bodies also can approve a project that will cause significant damage that cannot be mitigated, deeming them to be important enough to proceed with a declaration of “overriding consideration.”

“The Senior Center on Third Street is an example of overriding consideration,” Grossman said. “Almost all large projects need the declaration of overriding consideration because they cannot meet the strict interpretation of the Air Quality Management District regulations.”

Grossman and Johnson will coordinate with the newly established Environmental Committee to review Montgomery’s draft and suggestions made by resident Ed Almanza, who is a professional in the field.

Meetings will be public.

“I think it is healthy for the community to have this dialogue,” Almanza said. “The state gave us this tool, but it is kind of a blunt instrument until we adjust to our local environmental needs and planning objectives.”

The city adopted local procedures in 1977 and amended the original set of procedures in 1983, incorporating the state guidelines of that time, and continued to amend them in line with state changes.

“Therefore, technically, the city has up-to-date CEQA procedures just by referring and complying with the latest CEQA guidelines adopted by the California Resources Agency,” Montgomery said.

“However, on Oct. 22, 2005, the City Council requested the staff and the planning commission to update the city’s CEQA review procedures and guidelines.”

Lisa Marks, recently appointed to the Environmental Committee, said adequate time should be taken to compare the state guidelines with Montgomery’s draft and Almanza’s proposals.

“I think what you are discussing about going over the two documents is a very good idea,” Laguna Canyon Conservancy President Carolyn Wood said.

She proposed a CEQA workshop similar to one held in 2001.

“The Parking, Traffic and Circulation Committee, the Design Review Board and the City Council should all attend,” Wood said. “I would also suggest putting Title 14 on the city’s website.”

A report is due back to the commission on Nov. 15 for review and recommendations to the council.