BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                SB 375
                                                                       

                      SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
                        Senator S. Joseph Simitian, Chairman
                              2007-2008 Regular Session
                                           
           BILL NO:    SB 375
           AUTHOR:     Steinberg
           AMENDED:    April 17, 2007
           FISCAL:     Yes               HEARING DATE:     April 23, 2007
           URGENCY:    No                CONSULTANT:       Randy Pestor
            
           SUBJECT  :    TRANSPORTATION, LAND USE, AND CEQA

            SUMMARY  :    
           
            Existing law  :

           1) Establishes the California Transportation Commission (CTC)  
              and sets various duties and procedures for the CTC  
              (Government Code 14500 et seq.).

           2) Establishes the Department of Transportation (Caltrans),  
              with various responsibilities.

           3) Designates regional transportation planning agencies  
              (Government Code 29532.1) and provides for formation of a  
              local transportation planning commission (Government Code  
              29532).

           4) Under Long Range Transportation Planning Law (Government  
              Code 65070 et seq.), requires the California  
              Transportation Plan to include policy, strategies, and  
              recommendations elements; requires Caltrans to prepare a  
              federal transportation improvement program and annually  
              submit the program to the U.S. Secretary of Transportation.

           5) Under Transportation Planning and Programming Law  
              (Government Code 65080 et seq.):

              a)    Requires RTPAs to prepare and adopt a regional  
                 transportation plan that contains a policy element,  
                 action element, and financial element.

              b)    Authorizes RTPAs to designate special corridors,  









                                                                SB 375
                                                                 Page 2


                 requires preparation of a five-year regional  
                 transportation improvement program (RTIP); authorizes  
                 Caltrans to prepare a project studies report for  
                 capacity-increasing highway projects, and requires  
                 Caltrans to prepare guidelines for project studies by  
                 other entities.

           6) Under Congestion Management Law (Government Code 65088 et  
              seq.), authorizes a city or county to designate an infill  
              opportunity zone that must be consistent with any general  
              plan and specific plan.

           7) Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)  
              (Public Resources Code 21000 et seq.), requires lead  
              agencies with the principal responsibility for carrying out  
              or approving a proposed discretionary project to prepare a  
              negative declaration, mitigated declaration, or  
              environmental impact report (EIR) for this action, unless  
              the project is exempt from CEQA (CEQA includes various  
              statutory exemptions, as well as categorical exemptions in  
              the CEQA guidelines).

            This bill  :

           1) Requires the CTC to adopt guidelines for disbursement of  
              state transportation funding related to travel demand  
              models used in development or regional transportation plans  
              by RTPAs, and sets procedures for preparing the guidelines.  
               The guidelines must require that travel demand models be  
              capable of evaluating certain policy choices, such as  
              induced travel and induced land development, split modes,  
              proximity of residential uses to employment centers, and  
              parking charges.  The guidelines must apply to a RTPA for a  
              region with a population of 800,000 or more, and is  
              permissive for RTPAs with a lower population.

           2) Requires Caltrans, under Integrated Transportation and Land  
              Use Planning Law (Government Code 65089.60 et seq.), to  
              develop standards for disseminating the methodology,  
              results, and key assumptions of travel demand models that  
              is useable and understandable to the public, and meet at  










                                                                SB 375
                                                                 Page 3


              least annually with the CTC and certain agencies to  
              determine whether the models need additional revisions due  
              to new research or new requirements in state or federal  
              law.

           3) Requires a RTPA to demonstrate in its regional  
              transportation plan the extent to which its regional travel  
              demand models assist other public agencies to evaluate  
              large development projects, including impacts of density  
              and mixed land uses on travel.  The RTPA must report to the  
              CTC on how the regional travel demand model supports  
              certain planning.

           4) Under Long Range Transportation Planning Law, requires  
              system concepts and strategies in the California  
              Transportation Plan strategies element, and projects and  
              improvements in the federal transportation improvement  
              program, to be consistent with preferred growth scenarios  
              (PGSs) (see #3 below).

           5) Under Transportation Planning and Programming Law:

              a)    Requires the RTIP to include a PGS that meets certain  
                 requirements (e.g., identifies areas to house  
                 population, identifies significant resource land and  
                 farmland, complies with the federal Clean Air Act).

              b)    Requires special corridors to be consistent with the  
                 PGS, and requires projects in the RTIP and project  
                 studies report to be consistent with the PGS.

              c)    Defines "significant resource lands," "significant  
                 farmland," and "vehicle miles traveled."

           6) Under Congestion Management Law, requires an infill  
              opportunity zone to also be consistent with any PGS.

           7) Under CEQA, creates the Implementation of the Preferred  
              Growth Scenario Law that:

              a)    Applies within a local jurisdiction that has amended  










                                                                SB 375
                                                                 Page 4


                 its general plan so that the land use, circulation,  
                 housing, and open space elements are consistent with the  
                 PGS, and meet certain requirements.

              b)    Authorizes an environmental document to only examine  
                 the significant or potentially significant project  
                 specific impacts of a project located in an eligible  
                 jurisdiction, if an EIR has been certified on the PGS  
                 and on general plan amendments to conform to the PGS,  
                 and the project meets certain requirements, such as  
                 being an infill project within an urbanized area.

              c)    Authorizes an eligible jurisdiction to adopt a  
                 neighborhood plan if the plan meets certain  
                 requirements, such as access to a major transit stop and  
                 mitigates displacement of low-income and very low-income  
                 persons, and uses a planning process that complies with  
                 certain requirements.

              d)    Provides that if a legislative body of an eligible  
                 local jurisdiction finds that a project meets certain  
                 requirements, then the project is declared to be a  
                 sustainable communities' project and no additional  
                 review is required.

              e)    Authorizes an eligible local legislative body within  
                 an urbanized area to adopt traffic mitigation policies  
                 that would apply to future residential projects.  The  
                 traffic mitigation policies must apply to residential  
                 projects of at least 10 units per acre.  A residential  
                 project seeking a land use approval is not required to  
                 comply with certain additional traffic mitigation  
                 measures if the eligible jurisdiction has adopted  
                 traffic mitigation policies in accordance with these  
                 provisions.  This does not restrict the authority of a  
                 local jurisdiction to adopt feasible mitigation measures  
                 with respect to project impacts on pedestrian or bicycle  
                 safety.

           8) Authorizes up to $20 million from Proposition 84 or 1C for  
              smart growth planning and incentive grants to RTPAs to  










                                                                SB 375
                                                                 Page 5


              develop transportation planning model improvements.  Grants  
              must be awarded by the CTC, in consultation with Caltrans.

           9) Provides related legislative intent.

            COMMENTS  :

            1) Purpose of Bill  .  According to the author, "Current  
              planning models used for transportation decisions and air  
              quality planning must be improved to assess policy choices.  
               This includes encouraging more compact development  
              patterns, expanding transit service, creating walkable  
              communities, and providing incentives.  It is also  
              necessary to achieve significant greenhouse gas reductions  
              from changed land use patterns and improved transportation  
              to meet AB 32 standards."  The author notes that  
              "transportation and CEQA incentives are needed for greater  
              housing choices, shorter commutes, reduced climate  
              emissions, less air pollution, less fossil fuel  
              consumption, and greater conservation of farmlands and  
              habitat."

            2) Seeking a comprehensive transportation, land use, and CEQA  
              link  .  SB 375 seeks to be a comprehensive approach to  
              linking transportation, land use, and CEQA by requiring  
              RTPAs to develop a PGS, tying funding of transportation  
              projects to the PGS, requiring transportation modeling to  
              account for land use impacts on transportation, and  
              revising CEQA for local governments that conform plans to  
              the PGS.

            3) Support and concerns  .  Supporters note that SB 375 provides  
              a new vision for growth in California and "would establish  
              needed policies to implement AB 32 and to reduce greenhouse  
              gasses from light vehicles."

           The Planning and Conservation League and Sierra Club  
              California believe that the bill will not work because the  
              processes involved are lengthy, results of such local  
              transportation planning efforts usually achieve the "lowest  
              common denominator" in regional land use, and a more  










                                                                SB 375
                                                                 Page 6


              standards-based approach is needed.  These organizations  
              outline several concerns with SB 375, such as:  a) the lack  
              of needed policy statements; b) the absence of any entity  
              to determine if general plans or amendments are consistent  
              with the PGS; c) possible weakening of current CEQA  
              exemptions; d) no land use regulatory impact of the PGS so  
              that it is only intended to be used as the basis of the  
              transportation planning process; e) nothing requires the  
              PGS to direct growth to existing areas; f) no specific  
              protection for resource lands or farmlands since they are  
              to be avoided only if "feasible"; g) no enforceable  
              standard to counteract the largely economic pressures that  
              lead to sprawl, and may actually be sprawl inducing; h) the  
              lack of clarity about how SB 375 will accomplish VMT  
              reduction; and i) the "opportunity cost" associated with  
              spending money and time on a very indirect approach.

           PCL and Sierra Club California conclude that there is a need  
              to "find a way to redesign the state's land use policies  
              and transportation systems in a manner that will begin a  
              new, non-sprawl era of growth in California" and that  
              "articulating appropriate standards, to guide development  
              decisions, is a key step in that effort."

            4) Consistency with AB 857 state planning priorities  .  AB 857  
              (Wiggins/Sher) Chapter 1016, Statutes of 2002, requires the  
              Governor to annually submit (with the Budget) a proposed  
              five-year infrastructure plan.  The plan must cover a  
              five-fiscal-year period beginning with the fiscal year that  
              is the same as that covered by the Governor's Budget.  The  
              plan must include criteria and priorities used to identify  
              and select the infrastructure proposed for funding and must  
              specify sources of funding, an evaluation of the impact of  
              new state debt on the state's existing overall debt  
              position, and recommend specific projects for funding.  By  
              January 1, 2005, the infrastructure plan criteria must be  
              consistent with the state planning priorities enacted by AB  
              857.  These state planning priorities are intended to  
              promote equity, strengthen the economy, protect the  
              environment, and promote public health and safety by:  1)  
              promoting infill development and equity, 2) protecting  










                                                                SB 375
                                                                 Page 7


              environmental and agricultural resources, and 3)  
              encouraging efficient development patterns.  The state  
              environmental goals and policy report (EGPR) must also be  
              consistent with these priorities.

           To ensure consistency between state priorities for the state's  
              infrastructure plan, EGPR, and PGSs, the SB 375 PGS  
              requirements must also reference these state planning  
              priorities.

            5) Technical considerations  .  On page 24, line 12, strike  
              "no."  It may also be appropriate for SB 375 to contain a  
              delayed operative date for certain funding conditions.

            SOURCE  :        Senator Steinberg  

           SUPPORT  :       American Farmland Trust, American Lung  
                          Association, California League of Conservation  
                          Voters, Defenders of Wildlife, Environment  
                          California, Natural Resources Defense Council

           CONCERNS AND COMMENTS: 
           Planning and Conservation League, Sierra Club California  

           OPPOSITION  :    None on file