BILL ANALYSIS
SB 375
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 22, 2007
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mark Leno, Chair
SB 375 (Steinberg) - As Amended: July 17, 2007
Policy Committee: Local
GovernmentVote:5-1
Transportation 8-5
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill makes numerous changes with respect to regional
transportation and land use planning, with the overall goal of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the
transportation sector in California. Key provisions require the
larger regional transportation planning agencies to develop more
sophisticated transportation planning models, and to use them
for the purpose of creating "preferred growth scenarios" in
their regional plans that limit greenhouse gas emissions. The
bill also provides incentives for local governments to
incorporate these preferred growth scenarios into the
transportation elements of their general land use plans.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)The California Transportation Commission would incur one-time
costs of up to $200,000 in 2007-08 for the adoption of
modeling guidelines. Potential minor ongoing costs associated
with updated guidelines and reviews of regional models.
2)The California Air Resources Board would require one-half of
an additional PY in 2007-08 and 2008-09 (annual cost of
$72,500), and a full additional PY thereafter (annual cost of
$145,000) for the workload associated with this bill.
3)The requirement that regional transportation planning agencies
develop enhanced travel demand models and preferred growth
scenarios may result in a reimbursable state mandate,
potentially resulting in state costs exceeding several
millions of dollars.
SB 375
Page 2
SUMMARY (CONTINUED)
The main provisions of this bill are as follows:
1)Requires the California Transportation Commission (CTC), in
consultation with the Air Resources Board (ARB), to adopt
guidelines for travel demand models that are used by the
larger regional transportation planning agencies. Requires
these guidelines to account for the relationship between land
use density and household automobile usage, the impact of
enhanced transit service levels on vehicle usage, and the
amount of new travel and land development resulting from
highway or passenger rail expansion.
2)Requires the California Air Resources Board (ARB), in
consultation with the affected transportation agencies, to set
regional greenhouse gas emission reduction targets related to
the transportation sector, and establish measures to reduce
these emissions.
3)Requires regional transportation agencies to include in their
regional transportation plans a "preferred growth scenario,"
consistent with state planning priorities, which includes
various land-use elements (such as accommodation of housing
needs and development exclusions for open space and
farmlands), complies with the federal Clean Air Act, includes
an inventory of the region's emission of greenhouse gases from
automobiles and light trucks sector, and establishes measures
to reduce these emissions to the target levels developed by
the ARB. If the preferred growth scenario is unable to achieve
the ARB emission targets, the transportation agencies are
further required to prepare a supplement report showing how
the targets could be achieved through additional
transportation investments, land use incentives, or other
programs and incentives.
4)Requires that the preferred growth scenario exclude from
development a variety of lands, including publicly owned
parks, open space, habitat protection areas, farmland, and
floodplains.
5)Requires that most transportation projects funded beginning in
2009 be consistent with regional transportation plans.
Excludes from this requirement projects contained in the 2006
SB 375
Page 3
and 2008 federal transportation improvement programs or funded
pursuant to Proposition 1B.
6)Authorizes certain projects within an eligible local
jurisdiction to be exempted from specified California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. In order to
receive the exemption, the local jurisdiction must have
amended its general plan so that the land use, circulation,
housing, and open space elements are consistent with the
region's preferred growth scenario.
COMMENTS
1)Background. Existing law requires regional transportation
planning agencies to develop a transportation plan to provide
policy guidance to local and state officials in achieving a
coordinated regional transportation system. The regional plans
must contain a policy element, an action element, and a
financial element. Existing law also requires the CTC to adopt
the state transportation improvement program, which includes
all of the projects that are to receive state transportation
funding. About three-fourths of STIP funding is allocated
through regional transportation planning agencies.
Travel demand models are planning tools used by regional
transportation agencies in developing transportation plans.
The models attempt to quantify the impacts of alternative
transportation policies on such variables as automobile usage,
miles traveled, travel patterns, traffic congestion, and
regional development. The models differ from region to region
in terms of their size, sophistication, and the types of
variables forecasted. This bill is intended to provide a
uniform framework for regional agencies follow in improving
travel demand modeling statewide.
2)Rationale . Sponsors of this bill assert that changes in land
use and transportation policy must be made to achieve the
greenhouse gas emission reduction goals of AB 32. The bill is
intended to accomplish these objectives by (a) requiring
planners to develop and use sophisticated modeling tools to
estimate the impacts of growth policies on vehicle usage, and
(b) implementing a planning framework, along with fiscal
incentives, for achieving targeted emissions reductions.
3)Opponents assert that the bill requires unworkable new
SB 375
Page 4
land-use rules that erode local control. They also claim it
will (a) create undue complications with respect to housing
development, (b) result in costly reimbursable state mandate
for development of models and preferred growth scenarios, and
(c) potentially compromise future transportation funding.
Analysis Prepared by : Brad Williams / APPR. / (916) 319-2081