BILL ANALYSIS
SB 375
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 375 (Steinberg)
As Amended August 22, 2008
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :21-15
LOCAL GOVERNMENT 5-1 TRANSPORTATION 8-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Caballero, De La Torre, |Ayes:|Nava, Carter, DeSaulnier, |
| |Lieber, Saldana, Soto | |Galgiani, |
| | | |Karnette, Portantino, |
| | | |Ruskin, Solorio |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Smyth |Nays:|Duvall, Garrick, Horton, |
| | | |Huff, Soto |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 11-4 LOCAL GOVERNMENT 5-1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Leno, Caballero, Davis, |Ayes:|Caballero, De La Torre, |
| |DeSaulnier, Furutani, | |Hancock, Saldana, |
| |Huffman, Karnette, | |DeSaulnier |
| |Krekorian, Lieu, Ma, Nava | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Walters, Emmerson, La |Nays:|Smyth |
| |Malfa, Nakanishi | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to
include sustainable communities strategies (SCS), as defined, in
their regional transportation plans (RTPs) for the purpose of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, aligns planning for
transportation and housing, and creates specified incentives for
the implementation of the strategies. Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes findings and declarations concerning the need to make
significant changes in land use and transportation policy in
order to meet the greenhouse gas reduction goals established
by AB 32 (Nunez & Pavley), Chapter 444, Statutes of 2006.
SB 375
Page 2
2)States legislative intent that future projects, other than
those defined in this bill, that are consistent with a
sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning
strategy that has been accepted by the State Air Resources
Board may, to the extent authorized by provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), tier from the
analysis in an environmental impact report prepared by an
metropolitan planning organization of the impacts on global
warming from the greenhouse gas emissions of cars and light
trucks.
3)Requires the California Transportation Commission (CTC), in
consultation with the California Air Resources Board (ARB) and
the Department of Transportation (Caltrans), to maintain
travel demand models used in the development of RTPs by
federally designated MPOs.
4)Requires ARB, no later than January 31, 2009, to appoint a
Regional Targets Advisory Committee (committee) to recommend
factors to be considered and methodologies to be used for
setting greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for the
affected regions, and specifies the composition of the
committee, including, but not limited to, local transportation
agencies.
5)Requires the committee to transmit a report with its
recommendations to ARB no later than December 31, 2009, and
requires ARB to consider the report prior to setting targets.
6)Provides that, in recommending factors to be considered and
methodologies to be used, the committee may consider any
relevant issues, including, but not limited to, data needs,
modeling techniques, growth forecasts, the impacts of regional
jobs-housing balance on interregional travel and greenhouse
gas emissions, economic and demographic trends, the magnitude
of greenhouse gas reduction benefits from a variety of land
use and transportation strategies, and appropriate methods to
describe regional targets and to monitor performance in
attaining those targets.
7)Requires that, prior to setting the targets for a region, ARB
exchange technical information with Caltrans, the MPO, and the
affected air district, which may include a recommendation for
a target for the region.
SB 375
Page 3
8)Requires the MPO to hold at least one public workshop within
the region after receipt of the report from the committee.
9)Requires ARB to update the regional greenhouse gas emission
reduction targets every eight years consistent with each MPO's
timeframe for updating its RTP under federal law until 2050.
10)Authorizes ARB to revise the targets every four years based
on changes in specified factors, and requires ARB to exchange
technical information with the MPOs, local governments, and
affected air districts and engage in a consultative process
with public and private stakeholders prior to updating these
targets.
11)Requires the RTP for specified regions to include an SCS, as
specified, designed to achieve certain goals for the reduction
of greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks
in a region.
12)Specifies how the Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) are
to collaborate in the preparation of the SCS.
13)Specifies how the sub-regional councils of governments within
the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) will
be involved in the preparation of an SCS.
14)Requires each MPO to conduct at least two informational
meetings in each county within the region for members of the
board of supervisors and city councils on the SCS and
alternative planning strategy (APS), if any, subject to
specified conditions and exceptions.
15)Requires each MPO to adopt a public participation plan for
development of the SCS and an APS, as specified.
16)Requires an MPO to quantify the reduction in greenhouse gas
emissions projected to be achieved by the SCS and set forth
the difference, if any, between the amount of that reduction
and the target for the region established by ARB.
17)Requires that, if an SCS is unable to reach the ARB target,
the MPO prepare an APS to the SCS, as a separate document from
the RTP, showing how those greenhouse gas emission targets
would be achieved through alternative development patterns,
SB 375
Page 4
infrastructure, or additional transportation measures or
policies, as specified.
18)Requires that, prior to starting the public participation
process, the MPO submit a description to ARB of the technical
methodology it intends to use to estimate the greenhouse gas
emissions from its SCS and, if appropriate, its APS, and
requires ARB to respond to the MPO in a timely manner with
written comments about the technical methodology, including
specifically describing any aspects of the methodology that
will not yield accurate estimates of greenhouse gas emissions,
and suggested remedies.
19)Requires that, after adoption, an MPO submit an SCS or an
APS, if one has been adopted, to ARB for review, including the
quantification of the greenhouse gas emission reductions the
plan would achieve and a description of the technical
methodology used to obtain that result.
20)Limits ARB review to acceptance or rejection of the MPO's
determination that the strategy submitted would, if
implemented, achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduction
targets, and require ARB to complete its review within 60
days.
21)Requires that, if ARB determines that the strategy submitted
would not, if implemented, achieve the greenhouse gas emission
reduction targets, the MPO revise its strategy or adopt an
APS, if not previously adopted, and submit the strategy for
review.
22)Requires, at a minimum, that the MPO must obtain ARB
acceptance that an APS would, if implemented, achieve the
greenhouse gas emission reduction targets established for that
region.
23)States that:
a) An SCS or APS does not regulate the use of land, nor
shall it be subject to any state approval other than the
ARB action referred to above;
b) Nothing in an SCS or APS shall be interpreted as
superseding or interfering with the exercise of the land
use authority of cities and counties within the region;
SB 375
Page 5
c) Nothing in this bill shall be interpreted to authorize
the abrogation of any vested right whether created by
statute or by common law;
d) Nothing in this bill shall be interpreted to limit ARB's
authority under any other provision of law;
e) Nothing in this bill requires a city or county's land
use policies and regulations, including its general plan,
to be consistent with the RTP or an APS;
f) Nothing in this bill requires an MPO to approve an SCS
or APS that would be inconsistent with specified federal
regulations;
g) Nothing in this bill relieves a public or private entity
or any person from compliance with any other local, state,
or federal law; and,
h) Nothing in this bill requires a transportation sales tax
authority, as defined, to change the funding allocations
approved by the voters for categories of transportation
projects in a sales tax measure adopted prior to December
31, 2010.
24)Requires certain transportation planning and programming
activities to be consistent with the SCS in order to obtain
funding, but states that certain transportation projects
programmed for funding on or before December 31, 2011, are not
required to be consistent with the SCS.
25)Creates a mechanism by which an MPO, or regional
transportation agency not within an MPO, that is currently on
a five-year RTP cycle may elect to adopt an RTP on a four-year
cycle in order to conform with the other provisions of this
bill.
26)Authorizes MPOs in specified Central Valley counties to work
together to develop and adopt multi-regional goals and prepare
multi-regional SCS.
27)Adds areas designated for agricultural uses and agricultural
elements of general plans to the definition of "resource
areas."
SB 375
Page 6
28)Defines "consistent" as having the same meaning as in a
specified provision of federal law, and define "internally
consistent" as meaning that the elements of the RTP must be
consistent with one another.
29)Requires that, prior to and after the adoption of specified
forms, the housing element portion of the annual progress
report of a planning agency on implementation of its general
plans must include a section that describes the actions taken
by the local government towards completion of the programs and
status of the local government's compliance with the deadlines
in its housing element.
30)Changes the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) cycle
from five years to eight years.
31)Requires that rezoning of sites needed to meet RHNA
requirements, including adoption of minimum density and
development standards, shall be completed no later than three
years after either the date the housing element is adopted or
the date that is 90 days after receipt of comments from the
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD),
whichever is earlier, unless this deadline is extended, as
specified.
32)Requires a local government that has failed to adopt a
housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline for
doing so to complete the rezoning of sufficient RHNA sites no
later than three years and 120 days from the deadline to adopt
its housing element.
33)Allows the deadline for completing required rezoning to be
extended by one year if the local government has completed
rezoning at densities sufficient to accommodate at least 75%
of the sites for each income group and if the legislative body
at the conclusion of a public hearing determines, based upon
substantial evidence, makes specified findings.
34)Prohibits a local government that fails to complete the
rezoning by the deadline, as it may be extended, from
disapproving a housing development project, or requiring a
conditional use permit, planned unit development permit, or
other locally imposed discretionary permit or condition that
would render the project infeasible, if the housing
SB 375
Page 7
development project is proposed to be located on a site
required to be rezoned pursuant to the program required by
that subparagraph and complies with applicable, objective
general plan and zoning standards and criteria, including
design review standards, described in the program required by
that subparagraph.
35)Provides that any such subdivision of sites shall be subject
to the Subdivision Map Act but shall not constitute a
"project" for purposes of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA).
36)Provides that a local government that fails to complete its
rezoning may disapprove a housing development only if it makes
written findings supported by substantial evidence on the
record that the housing development project would have a
specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety
unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the
condition that the project be developed at a lower density,
and that there is no feasible method to satisfactorily
mitigate or avoid the adverse impact other than the
disapproval of the housing development project or the approval
of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a
lower density.
37)Permits the applicant or any interested person to bring an
action to enforce these provisions, and specifies that if a
court finds that the local agency disapproved a project or
conditioned its approval in violation of these provisions, the
court shall issue an order or judgment compelling compliance
within 60 days, retain jurisdiction to ensure that its order
or judgment is carried out, and, if it determines that its
order or judgment has not been carried out within 60 days, the
court may issue further orders to ensure that the purposes and
policies of this paragraph are fulfilled.
38)Provides that, in an action brought against a local
government for failing to complete rezoning, the burden of
proof shall be borne by the local government.
39)Defines "housing development project" as a project to
construct residential units if the project developer provides
sufficient legal commitments to the appropriate local agency
to ensure the continued availability and use of at least 49%
of the housing units for very low-, low-, and moderate-income
SB 375
Page 8
households at monthly housing costs with an affordable housing
cost or affordable rent, as defined, for the period required
by the applicable financing.
40)Specifies that rental units shall be affordable for at least
55 years, and that ownership units shall be subject to resale
restrictions or equity sharing requirements for at least 30
years.
41)Requires that a council of governments (COG) provide HCD with
data assumptions about the relationship between jobs and
housing in the region, if available, to assist HCD in
determining the region's RHNA.
42)States legislative intent that:
a) Housing planning be coordinated and integrated with the
RTP;
b) To achieve this goal, the allocation plan shall allocate
housing units within the region consistent with the
development pattern included in the SCS;
c) The final allocation plan shall ensure that the total
regional housing need, by income category, is maintained,
and that each jurisdiction in the region receive an
allocation of units for low- and very low-income
households; and,
d) The resolution approving the final housing need
allocation plan shall demonstrate that the plan is
consistent with the SCS in the RTP.
43)Directs a court that finds that a city, county, or city and
county has failed to complete the required rezoning, as that
deadline may be extended, to issue an order or judgment
compelling the local government to complete the rezoning
within 60 days or the earliest time consistent with public
hearing notice requirements in place at the time the action
was filed and the overall equities of the circumstances as
presented by all parties, to retain jurisdiction to ensure
that its order or judgment is carried out, and, if the court
determines that its order or judgment is not carried out, to
issue further orders, including ordering that any required
rezoning be completed within 60 days or the earliest time
SB 375
Page 9
consistent with public hearing notice requirements, and may
impose sanctions on the city, county, or city and county,
taking into account the overall equities of the circumstances
presented by all parties.
44)Permits any interested person to bring an action to compel
compliance with the specified deadlines and requirements, and
specify that in any such action, the city, county, or city and
county shall bear the burden of proof.
45)Requires a local government that does not adopt a housing
element within 120 days of the statutory deadline for the
adoption of the housing element to revise its housing element
as appropriate, but not less than every four years, rather
than eight years.
46)Requires all local governments within an MPO in a
non-attainment region, other than those within the
jurisdiction of the San Diego Association of Governments
(SANDAG), to adopt the fifth revision of their housing
elements no later than 18 months after the adoption of the
first RTP to be adopted after September 30, 2010.
47)Requires local governments within SANDAG to adopt their fifth
revision no later than five years from the fourth revision,
and their sixth revision no later than 18 months after the
adoption of the first RTP to be adopted after the fifth
revision due date.
48)Requires local governments within an MPO that has elected to
move from a five-year to a four-year RTP cycle to adopt an
eight-year RHNA cycle and to adopt their next housing elements
18 months after the adoption of the first RTP after the
election.
49)Defines "planning period" as the time period for periodic
revision of a jurisdiction's housing element.
50)Specifies that, with one exception, the Implementation of the
Sustainable Communities Strategy chapter of CEQA applies only
to a transit priority project that is consistent with the
general use designation, density, building intensity, and
applicable policies specified for the project area in either
an SCS or an APS, for which ARB has accepted an MPO's
determination that the SCS or APS would, if implemented,
SB 375
Page 10
achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
51)Requires a transit priority project to: a) contain at least
50% residential use, based on total building square footage
and, if the project contains between 26% and 50%
nonresidential uses, a floor area ratio of not less than 0.75;
b) provides a minimum net density of at least
20 dwelling units per acre; and, c) be within one-half mile of
an existing or planned major transit stop, as defined, or
high-quality transit corridor, as defined, as set forth in the
applicable regional transportation plan.
52)Specifies that, for purposes of defining a transit priority
project, all parcels within the project have no more than 25%
of their area farther than one-half mile from a transit stop
or corridor and that no more than 10% or 100 residential
units, whichever is less are less than one-half mile from a
transit stop or corridor.
53)Provides that no additional review is required pursuant to
CEQA for a transit priority project if the legislative body of
a local jurisdiction finds, after conducting a public hearing,
that the project meets specified criteria and is declared to
be a sustainable community's project.
54)Requires that in the initial study for a sustainable
communities environmental assessment or environmental impact
report (EIR) for a transit priority project that has met
specified criteria, the lead agency shall determine whether
cumulative impacts have been both adequately addressed and
adequately mitigated in prior certified EIRs.
55)Authorizes the legislative body of a local jurisdiction to
adopt traffic mitigation measures for future residential
projects that meet specified criteria, and exempts such a
residential project seeking a land use approval from
compliance with additional measures for traffic impacts, if
the local jurisdiction has adopted those traffic mitigation
measures.
56)Specifies that, if a residential or mixed-use residential
project is consistent with the use designation, density,
building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the
project area in either an SCS or an APS, for which ARB has
accepted the MPO's determination that the SCS or the APS
SB 375
Page 11
would, if implemented, achieve the greenhouse gas emission
reduction targets and if the project incorporates the
mitigation measures required by an applicable prior
environmental document, any findings or other determinations
for an exemption, a negative declaration, a mitigated negative
declaration, an EIR, or addenda prepared or adopted for the
project pursuant to CEQA shall not be required to reference,
describe, or discuss growth inducing impacts or any project
specific or cumulative impacts from cars and light-duty truck
trips generated by the project on global warming or the
regional transportation network.
57)Specifies that any EIR prepared for a project described above
shall not be required to reference, describe, or discuss a
reduced residential density alternative to address the effects
of car and light-duty truck trips generated by the project.
58)Defines "regional transportation network" as all existing and
proposed transportation improvements, including the state
transportation system, that were included in the
transportation and air quality conformity modeling, including
congestion modeling, for the final RTP adopted by the MPO, but
shall not include local streets and roads.
59)Specifies that nothing in the foregoing relieves any project
from a requirement to comply with any conditions, exactions,
or fees for the mitigation of the project's impacts on the
regional transportation network or local streets and roads.
60)Defines a "residential or mixed-use residential project" as a
project where at least 75% of the total building square
footage of the project consists of residential use or a
project that is a transit priority project.
61)States that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines
that this bill contains costs mandated by the state,
reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those
costs shall be made pursuant applicable sections of the
Government Code.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Substantial costs to MPOs to incorporate sustainable community
strategies into their regional transportation plans. MPOs
SB 375
Page 12
have authority to use federal funds to cover planning costs,
as well as to charge member local governments to cover costs,
but total costs and composition of funding sources are
unspecified.
2)Unknown net cost impact on cities. Aside from potential
charges from MPOs, cities would also face higher costs
related to: a) the increased complexity of general plan
housing elements; b) the requirement that cities rezone land
within three years after the housing element is adopted; and,
c) the likelihood that they will receive additional requests
for amendments to their general plans to accommodate
developments consistent with sustainable communities
strategies (costs for granting these requests can be charged
to the developer). Offsetting these costs is the shift from a
five-year to eight-year regional housing needs planning cycle,
which implies less frequent updates to housing elements. The
bill states that if the Commission on State Mandate determines
that the bill contains local costs mandated by the state,
reimbursements will be provided.
3)Preliminary estimates from ARB indicate that it will incur
one-time costs of $740,000 and ongoing costs of about $440,000
relating to setting regional greenhouse gas emission reduction
targets for the auto and light truck sector, and reviewing
MPO's sustainable communities strategies. Costs are for two
new positions ($340,000 annually) and contracts with the
University of California for technical assistance ($400,000
one-time and $100,000 ongoing).
4)CTC would incur one-time costs about $200,000 for the adoption
of modeling guidelines, and potential minor ongoing costs
associated with updating guidelines and reviewing regional
models.
5)The Office of Planning and Research (OPR) would incur one-time
costs of about $86,000 to update general plan and CEQA
guidelines.
6)HCD, which is responsible for reviewing housing elements of
local general plans, would face both costs and savings under
the bill, which it believes would be largely offsetting.
Increased complexity of local housing elements would result in
added time and expense associated with each plan review.
However, this will be offset by less-frequent revisions (from
SB 375
Page 13
once every five years to once every eight years) of local
general plans' housing elements, and a consequent reduction in
the number of reviews that it must perform each year.
COMMENTS :
1)According to the author, this bill provides a mechanism for
reducing greenhouse gases from the single largest sector of
emissions, cars and light trucks. The environmental
organizations sponsoring this legislation maintain that
changes in land use and transportation policy must be made to
achieve the goals of AB 32. Although greenhouse gas emissions
can be reduced by producing more fuel efficient cars and using
low ARBon fuel, reductions in vehicle miles traveled will also
be necessary. Thus, the travel demand models used by MPOs to
develop RTPs must assess the effects of land use decisions,
transit service, and economic incentives. According to the
author, this bill will help implement AB 32 by amending
programs that are beyond the current authority of ARB. This
bill integrates and aligns planning for housing, land use,
transportation and greenhouse gas emissions for the 17 MPOs in
the state through amendments to provisions in existing law in
three major areas.
2)Regional Transportation Plans . This bill requires ARB, after
considering the recommendations from a broadly based advisory
committee, to provide targets to the MPOs for greenhouse gas
emission reductions for cars and light duty truck trips from
the regional land use and transportation system by July 1,
2010. Each MPO, through significant involvement with the
public and its member cities and counties, will then prepare
an SCS as a component of its RTP that meets the target, if
feasible. It must use transportation and air emission
modeling techniques consistent with guidelines prepared by CTC
to document the greenhouse gas emissions. If the SCS does not
meet the target, the MPO must adopt an APS, as a separate
document from the RTP that does. However, the MPO is not
required to implement the APS because it may include amounts
of transportation funding and changes to land use patterns
that go beyond what federal law allows. ARB may accept or
reject the MPO's determination that the SCS or APS meets the
target, but it does not approve the SCS or APS and it may not
suggest or require that the MPO make changes to either
document. The adopted RTP must be an "internally consistent"
document, and current requirements that transportation funds
SB 375
Page 14
may only be spent on projects consistent with the RTP are
unchanged. Projects already programmed in the Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) through 2011, and
projects, programs, and categories of projects in any county
sales tax measure approved by the voters prior to December,
2010, are expressly exempted from the provisions of the bill.
Several safeguards in the bill are included to preserve local
government land use authority.
3)Regional housing needs assessments . Each MPO would be
required to update RHNA every eight years instead of every
five years as required by current law. This will allow the
RHNA process to align with updates to the RTPs, which federal
law requires to be done every four years. This bill amends
the HCD process for setting the regional housing allocations
for MPOs to encourage planning for sufficient housing for the
projected employment growth in a region. The MPO's allocation
of RHNA shares to each of the cities and counties in its
jurisdiction will be required to be consistent with the SCS.
Local governments would be required to rezone sites to be
consistent with their updated housing elements within three
years (four years if the local government has completed 75% of
its rezoning by the third year and meets one of three
conditions: circumstances out of its control, lack of
infrastructure to serve the sites, or need for a major update
to its general plan to meet its RHNA allocation). If a local
government does not update its housing element within 120 days
of the statutory deadline, it will be required to update its
RHNA every four years.
4)California Environmental Quality Act . Residential and
mixed-use projects that are consistent with an SCS or APS that
ARB accepts as meeting its greenhouse gas target will not have
to be analyzed under CEQA for growth-inducing impacts or
impacts on global warming or on the regional transportation
network. A lead agency would not be required to consider a
reduced density alternative because of car and light duty
truck trips. A limited set of projects that meet a very
stringent series of environmental and other criteria would be
exempt from any CEQA analysis. Limited CEQA review would be
available to projects with a density of 20 dwelling units/acre
that are within one-half mile of current or planned high
quality transit service for any impacts that are sufficiently
analyzed and mitigated in the RTP's EIR. Finally, qualifying
local governments would be able to establish their own
SB 375
Page 15
mitigation standards for local traffic impacts.
Analysis Prepared by : J. Stacey Sullivan / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958
FN: 0007495