Serving clients in Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New Maxico, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington .
(818) 697-6626
Services

Project Review Process and Procedures for the City as a Responsible Agency in the City of Richmond

Section 9: Project Review Process

9.1 General Overview

In the City of Richmond, the project review process is designed to facilitate the efficient processing of applications while ensuring thorough environmental scrutiny. To maximize efficiency, staff and advisory bodies will continue their processing activities during the preparation and review of environmental documents, even prior to project approval by the decision-making body. This approach allows for a smoother workflow and quicker responsiveness to project applications, ensuring that environmental considerations are integrated from the outset.

9.2 Public Notices

Public participation is a cornerstone of the decision-making process. Therefore, all public notices typically used in this context must explicitly reference the existence of an environmental document. Each notice should indicate where the document is accessible for public inspection, thereby ensuring transparency in the review process. For projects that utilize a program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance, the notice will include clear statements indicating that the activity falls within the scope of the previously approved program EIR. This includes an assertion that the program EIR adequately encompasses the project for CEQA purposes, in accordance with Section 15168(e) of the CEQA Guidelines. Such transparency in public notices enhances community engagement and fosters informed public discourse.

9.3 Consideration of Environmental Documents by Advisory Bodies

Advisory bodies play a vital role in Richmond’s CEQA process by providing essential feedback to City staff during the public review period. These bodies are tasked with the responsibility of reviewing environmental documents and offering comments that will be incorporated into the final document presented to the decision-making body. This collaborative effort ensures that significant environmental issues identified by advisory bodies receive proper attention. In cases where substantial concerns are raised, it is the duty of the staff planner or Planning Director to formulate appropriate responses to these issues, which will then be integrated into the final environmental document. This process not only promotes accountability but also enhances the quality and comprehensiveness of environmental reviews.

9.4 Consideration of Environmental Documents by Decision-Making Bodies

A. General Review Process

In the context of these Guidelines, the decision-making bodies consist solely of the City Council and the Planning Commission. Prior to making any determinations regarding project approval or disapproval, these bodies must review and certify the environmental document. This includes an examination of the information contained within the final environmental document as well as any comments received during the public review process. This rigorous review process underscores the commitment of the City to uphold environmental integrity and compliance with CEQA regulations.

B. Exempt Projects

For projects deemed exempt from CEQA, specific procedures apply:

  1. The decision-making body must include a finding in any ordinance or document approving the project that states: "That the project is exempt from CEQA, based on (specific basis for exemption), and therefore, no environmental documents are required." This requirement ensures clarity regarding the exemption status of the project.

  2. If the decision-making body determines that the exemption is not substantiated by the available facts, they retain the authority to disapprove the exemption. In such instances, the staff planner is tasked with immediately commencing an Initial Study for the project, as outlined in Section 5. This step ensures that even projects initially considered exempt undergo necessary scrutiny should new information arise.

C. Projects with Negative Declarations

For projects that result in Negative Declarations, the following procedures must be adhered to:

  1. The Draft Negative Declaration must be completed and approved within 180 days from the date the application is certified as complete. This timeframe establishes a clear expectation for project proponents regarding the processing of Negative Declarations.

  2. Upon approval, the decision-making body shall include one of the following findings in any document or ordinance pertaining to project approval:

    • "A Negative Declaration has been prepared, processed, and considered according to CEQA, and it is found that the project cannot or will not have a significant effect on the environment."
    • Alternatively, "Although the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, it is found that there will not be a significant effect in this instance due to the mitigation measures specified in the Negative Declaration and included in the project description."

  3. Should the decision-making body find that the Negative Declaration is not adequately supported by facts or if there is significant public controversy regarding the environmental impacts of the project, they may choose to disapprove it. In such cases, the staff planner will proceed with the preparation of an EIR, as delineated in Section 7. This provision reflects the City’s commitment to addressing public concerns and ensuring that all potential environmental impacts are thoroughly evaluated.

D. Projects with Previous Environmental Documentation

For projects that rely on previously prepared environmental documentation, the following considerations apply:

  1. The decision-making body must make appropriate findings in accordance with Sections 15153, 15091, and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines. This ensures that past environmental assessments are effectively utilized and updated as necessary for new projects.

  2. If the decision-making body concludes that the existing environmental document is inadequate under the criteria outlined in the aforementioned sections, a majority of the decision-making body must determine whether a Negative Declaration or additional EIR is warranted for the project. This process reflects the City’s dedication to maintaining high standards for environmental review and accountability.

E. Projects with a Final or Supplemental EIR or an Addendum to an EIR

For projects requiring a Final, Supplemental, or Addendum to an EIR, the following procedures must be followed:

  1. The Final EIR, Supplemental EIR, or Addendum must be completed and ready for approval within one year from the date the application is certified as complete, unless the applicant has agreed to extend this deadline, as approved by the Planning Director. This provision helps ensure timely processing of environmental reviews.

  2. The decision-making body may conduct a public hearing regarding the Final EIR, Supplemental EIR, or Addendum in accordance with Section 15202. This hearing can occur concurrently with or prior to the hearing on the proposed project. It is essential that no proposed Final, Supplemental, or Addendum EIR is considered for certification unless it has been properly placed on the decision-making body’s agenda, and the public review period for the EIR has concluded. This stipulation reinforces the importance of public involvement and transparency in the decision-making process.

  3. During the public hearing, the decision-making body will solicit testimony regarding the EIR, Supplemental EIR, or Addendum that is on their agenda. Any significant environmental issues raised during these discussions, along with responses to these concerns, must be documented and included in the Final, Supplemental, or Addendum EIR before certification. This practice enhances the integrity of the environmental review process by ensuring that public feedback is considered.

  4. Findings: For projects associated with a Final, Supplemental, or Addendum EIR, the decision-making body must make a finding as part of any resolution approving the project, stating: "That the Final EIR (and any supplemental or Addendum) has been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State Guidelines, and the City’s procedures. The decision-making body, having the final approval authority over the project, has reviewed and considered the information contained in the EIR (and any supplement or Addendum) and found it adequately addresses the environmental effects of the proposed project."

    • The decision-making body may still approve a project even if one or more significant effects have been identified, provided they make specific findings. These findings must assert that either the impact has been substantially mitigated through changes made to the project, the responsibility for these changes falls upon a public agency other than the one making the finding, or that the proposed mitigation measures or project alternatives are not feasible (refer to Section 15091 of the Guidelines). This provision acknowledges the complexity of balancing development with environmental protection.

  5. Statement of Overriding Considerations: In instances where the decision-making body allows significant effects identified in the Final, Supplemental, or Addendum EIR to occur without mitigation, they must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, following the guidelines set forth in Section 15093. This statement outlines the reasoning behind allowing significant impacts to occur, emphasizing the need for thorough justification in cases where environmental considerations are overridden.

Section 10: Procedures for the City as a Responsible Agency

10.1 General Overview

As a Responsible Agency under the provisions of Section 15096 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Richmond has specific duties to fulfill. These responsibilities are designed to ensure that the City appropriately responds to environmental documents prepared by Lead Agencies and that its own environmental review processes are in alignment with CEQA requirements.

10.2 Response to Consultation

The Planning Director or their designated representative is responsible for responding to consultation requests made by a Lead Agency. This response must adhere to the stipulations outlined in Section 15096(b) of the Guidelines. By actively participating in this consultation process, the City helps ensure that its interests and environmental considerations are adequately addressed in the Lead Agency's environmental documents.

10.3 Meetings

In order to facilitate effective communication and collaboration, the Planning Director or their representative is also required to attend meetings requested by the Lead Agency. This is consistent with the provisions set forth in Section 15096(c) of the Guidelines. Participation in these meetings enables the City to engage in meaningful discussions regarding the potential impacts of proposed projects and to express any concerns related to environmental compliance.

10.4 Comments on Draft EIRs and Negative Declarations

The Planning Director or their representative is expected to review and provide comments on Draft Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) and Negative Declarations in accordance with Section 15096 of the Guidelines. When deemed appropriate, the Director may place the document on the Planning Commission's agenda for public review and comment. Alternatively, with the consent of the City Manager, the item may be referred for comments by the City Council. This collaborative approach to reviewing environmental documents ensures that the City’s input is conveyed effectively and that relevant departments and bodies are informed of the comments submitted to the Lead Agency.

10.5 Notice of Determination

The Notice of Determination is a crucial document that must be filed following the procedures specified under Section 7.8 of these guidelines and Section 15096(g)(1)(i) of the CEQA Guidelines. This notice serves to inform the public and relevant stakeholders about the Lead Agency's decision regarding the environmental impacts of a project, as well as the City’s position as a Responsible Agency in this context. By fulfilling this requirement, the City demonstrates its commitment to transparency and accountability in the environmental review process.

 

Our Services are available throughout City of Richmond with Zipcode 94807, 94808

Serving Both Public and Private Sector Clients

Based in Los Angeles California, our firm provides comprehensive transportation consulting services from conceptual planning onward, with the goal of delivering efficient, high-quality creative solutions and seeing them through to the completion of projects. We have skilled traffic engineers and transportation planners to undertake a variety of projects with confidence while meeting the needs of a diverse clientele.

Get a Quote