Willows City planners review CEQA tiers, technical studies and public review process

Delaney Garlic, a senior planner with Harrison Associates serving as a contract planner for Willows City, told the Planning Commission on May 20 that “all applications are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA.” She outlined the tiered review process commissioners are likely to see for development projects in Willows.

Garlic said many smaller infill projects qualify for categorical or statutory exemptions, which avoid full environmental review. When an exemption is not appropriate, staff usually prepares an initial study and, if no substantial impacts are identified, a negative declaration. If the study identifies impacts that can be reduced with specific measures, the city can adopt a mitigated negative declaration. For large sites with unavoidable significant impacts, Garlic said an environmental impact report (EIR) is required.

Garlic explained that technical studies — for biology, traffic (vehicle miles traveled), noise, cultural resources and similar topics — feed the initial study. Those studies are typically prepared by consultants retained by applicants and then reviewed by city staff and, when necessary, by the city’s own peer reviewers. Garlic said the city ultimately accepts and files the CEQA determination: “the city is going to say, we trust that this biologist that was hired was approved and that the information they provided is accurate.” She added that state and regional agencies such as the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol comment during the public review period.

Commissioners heard that draft environmental documents are submitted to the State Clearinghouse (referred to in the presentation as “SequaNet”/state clearinghouse) for a public review period — commonly 30 days for many documents — during which agencies and the public may comment. Garlic and other presenters emphasized that public comments and agency responses should be addressed before a matter returns to a hearing body for certification and action.

Garlic warned of litigation risk if CEQA procedures are not followed and described a typical staff workflow: early scoping to identify likely studies, use of exemptions where justified, consultant reports, in‑house peer review and then public circulation through the State Clearinghouse prior to a hearing. She said tribal consultation and specialized cultural studies may be required for larger EIRs.

Ending: Harrison Associates recommended that commissioners expect most local projects to fall into exemptions or negative declarations, but be prepared to review the reasoning and technical studies when larger projects require mitigations or an EIR.