BILL ANALYSIS ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 987| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ THIRD READING Bill No: AB 987 Author: Ma (D) Amended: 8/18/10 in Senate Vote: 21 SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE : 3-1, 6/16/10 AYES: Kehoe, DeSaulnier, Price NOES: Aanestad NO VOTE RECORDED: Cox ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 43-29, 1/27/10 - See last page for vote SUBJECT : Transit village development districts SOURCE : Author DIGEST : This bill expands the maximum size of a transit village development district from the total area within one-quarter mile of the exterior boundary of the parcel on which a transit station is located to the total area within one-half mile of a transit station's main entrance. Senate Floor Amendments of 8/18/10 avoid a chaptering-out problem by inserting double-jointing provisions. ANALYSIS : The Transit Village Development Act allows cities and counties to plan for more intense development around transit stations: rail or light-rail stations, ferry terminals, bus hubs, or bus transfer stations. Transit village plans identify areas where officials want CONTINUED AB 987 Page 2 to encourage transit-oriented development and grant density bonuses (AB 3152 [Bates], Chapter 780, Statutes of 1994). The maximum size of a transit village development district is the total area within one-quarter mile from the exterior boundary of the parcel on which the transit station is located. This bill expands the maximum size of a transit village development district from the total area within one-quarter mile of the exterior boundary of the parcel on which a transit station is located to the total area within one-half mile of a transit station's main entrance. This bill revises the legislative declarations within the Transit Village Planning Act and adds two more findings regarding environmental conditions and sustainable development standards. This bill also clarifies that the Act's reference to a "county" also means a city and county. Comments The public sector's investment in commuter rail, light-rail, ferries, and bus lines is part of a wider strategy to improve air quality, save energy, and improve mobility. When communities encourage transit agencies to build expensive systems, but then fail to promote higher density development around transit stations, the loss is environmental and social, as well as physical and fiscal. Those losses are regional, not just local. One reason that communities do not encourage denser, more compact development around transit stations is the cost of public works needed to support new residents and businesses. Although this bill does not create a new funding source for those public works, it encourages local officials and their planners to take a wider view of transit village development. By expanding and redefining the area for transit village planning, this bill widens the policy horizon. Prior Legislation AB 338 (Ma), 2009-10 Session, would have waived the voter-approval requirements for setting up infrastructure AB 987 Page 3 financing districts (IFDs) and issuing IFD bonds. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the 2009 Ma bill because "elections are the sole basis of public input and fiscal discipline in the creation of an IFD, and it is necessary to require voter approval." Besides expanding the planning area, AB 1221 (Ma), 2007-08 Session, would have linked IFDs to transit village development. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the 2008 Ma bill because he said that it was not a statewide priority. Unlike the two recent attempts, this year's bill does not amend the IFD law. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 8/18/10) California Transit Association City of Torrance San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/18/10) Department of Housing and Community Development ASSEMBLY FLOOR : AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Beall, Block, Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huffman, Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Monning, Nava, John A. Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson, Torres, Torrico, Yamada NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Conway, Cook, DeVore, Emmerson, Fletcher, Fuller, Gaines, Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Harkey, Huber, Jeffries, Knight, Logue, Miller, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Silva, Smyth, Audra Strickland, Tran, Villines NO VOTE RECORDED: Carter, De Leon, Hall, V. Manuel Perez, Torlakson, Bass AB 987 Page 4 AGB:mw 8/19/10 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END ****