BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1962|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT
Bill No: AB 1962
Author: Allen (D)
Amended: 3/29/12 in Assembly
Vote: 21
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMM. : 9-0, 6/19/12
AYES: DeSaulnier, Gaines, Harman, Kehoe, Lowenthal,
Pavley, Rubio, Simitian, Wyland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 5/17/12 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District: city
or county
design review
SOURCE : Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District
DIGEST : This bill repeals the requirement that the
Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District obtain advisory
review of a rail transit facility project through the
design review process of the relevant city or county.
ANALYSIS : Existing law establishes the Sonoma-Marin Area
Rail Transit (SMART) District for the purpose of providing
a unified, comprehensive institutional structure for the
ownership and governance of a passenger rail system within
the counties of Sonoma and Marin. SMART will provide rail
service along 70 miles of the historic Northwestern Pacific
Railroad alignment, serving 14 stations from Cloverdale in
Sonoma County to the San Francisco-bound ferry terminal in
CONTINUED
AB 1962
Page
2
Larkspur, Marin County. The first construction work began
in May 2012.
Existing law mostly exempts SMART from the general rule
that local agencies comply with all applicable building
ordinances and zoning ordinances of the county or city in
which the agency is situated. Only in the event that SMART
participates in the development of transit-oriented
residential or commercial projects adjacent to its stations
must it comply with land use and zoning regulations of the
city or county in which the project is located. With
respect to rail transit facilities (e.g., stations,
platforms, terminals, parking lots, and connecting bicycle
and pedestrian pathways), SMART must comply only with the
design review process of the city or county in which the
facility will be located, and then only for advisory
purposes.
This bill repeals the requirement that SMART obtain
advisory review of a rail transit facility project through
the design review process of the relevant city or county.
Comments
With respect to rail transit facilities, SMART is
specifically exempt from having to comply with local
building and zoning ordinances yet is required to comply
with a city's or county's design review processes for
advisory purposes. According to the author, opponents of
the project may use the advisory role of the design review
as a delay tactic, negatively impacting the project's
schedule and increasing costs. To avoid delays and
potential cost increases, this bill repeals the requirement
to seek advisory design review from the city or county for
SMART's rail transit facilities.
The author further contends that SMART already has a design
review process for their rail stations, making a required
hearing by each local design review board redundant and
without benefit. Moreover, 10 of the 12 directors on the
SMART board are city councilmembers or county supervisors,
making then sensitive to local concerns.
SMART's design review process . According to SMART, it held
CONTINUED
AB 1962
Page
3
a total of 24 station design workshops, at least one in
every community along the rail corridor, in 2010 and 2011
to generate input on station site plans and preferences for
station amenities, and these meetings strongly informed
SMART's station designs. Thereafter, at both the 20% and
30% engineering design levels, SMART distributed its
engineering drawings, including those for stations, to each
city and county and to members of the public and made
adjustments based on the comments received.
SMART continues to solicit input from its local government
partners by distributing construction plans to affected
cities and counties as it develops its designs and through
its Technical Advisory Committee, which is comprised of
representatives of cities and counties and discusses
matters related to design, construction, and operations.
To reinforce its commitment to local input, the SMART board
adopted a resolution in April 2012 that directs the general
manager to submit a letter and station design information
to the county administrator or city manager and the mayor
or president of the board of supervisors of each affected
jurisdiction prior to the time at which station engineering
drawings reach 75% design level in order to seek feedback
and input from the city or county.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/21/12)
Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (source)
City of Novato
City of Santa Rosa
City of Rohnert Park
County of Marin
County of Sonoma
Flasher Barricade Association
Marin Builders Association
Mayor Debora Fudge, City of Windsor
Mayor Gary O. Phillips, City of San Rafael
Mayor Jake McKenzie, City of Rohnert Park
CONTINUED
AB 1962
Page
4
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 5/17/12
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall,
Bill Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos,
Carter, Cedillo, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Davis, Dickinson,
Donnelly, Eng, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Beth
Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gatto, Gordon, Gorell, Grove,
Hagman, Halderman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Roger
Hernández, Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones,
Knight, Lara, Logue, Ma, Mansoor, Mendoza, Miller,
Mitchell, Monning, Morrell, Nestande, Nielsen, Norby,
Olsen, Pan, V. Manuel Pérez, Portantino, Silva, Smyth,
Solorio, Swanson, Torres, Valadao, Wagner, Wieckowski,
Williams, John A. Pérez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Fletcher, Bonnie Lowenthal, Perea,
Skinner, Yamada
JJA:n 6/21/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED