BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 468|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 468
Author: Kehoe (D)
Amended: 8/31/11
Vote: 21
SENATE NATURAL RES. AND WATER COMMITTEE : 5-3, 4/12/11
AYES: Pavley, Evans, Kehoe, Padilla, Wolk
NOES: La Malfa, Cannella, Fuller
NO VOTE RECORDED: Simitian
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE : 6-2, 5/3/11
AYES: DeSaulnier, Kehoe, Lowenthal, Pavley, Rubio,
Simitian
NOES: Gaines, Harman
NO VOTE RECORDED: Huff
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 6-2, 5/26/11
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Pavley, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Runner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Emmerson
SENATE FLOOR : 24-15, 6/1/11
AYES: Alquist, Calderon, Corbett, De León, DeSaulnier,
Evans, Hancock, Hernandez, Kehoe, Leno, Lieu, Liu,
Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Pavley, Price, Rubio,
Simitian, Steinberg, Vargas, Wolk, Wright, Yee
NOES: Anderson, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Cannella, Correa,
Dutton, Emmerson, Fuller, Gaines, Harman, Huff, La Malfa,
Strickland, Walters, Wyland
NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 61-16, 9/8/11 - See last page for vote
CONTINUED
SB 468
Page
2
SUBJECT : Department of Transportation:
capacity-increasing state highway projects:
coastal zone
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill sets forth comprehensive requirements
and accompanying authority for development of the North
Coast Corridor Project (NCCP) in and near the Interstate 5
corridor in San Diego County.
Assembly Amendments (1) clarify that collaboration between
agencies include the public works plan and the San Diego
Association of Governments (SANDAG) recommend a freeway
width alternative no wider the "8+4" lanes to Caltrans, (2)
clarify the role of the Coastal Commission regarding it
review of rail projects within the North Coast Corridor,
(3) define an additional requirement for the development of
a public works plan, (4) define the NCCP and how the
agreement between agencies is recognized by the
Legislature, and (5) delete the requirement that the
SANDAG, the North County Transit District, and the
California Department of Transportation cooperatively
develop a single transit improvement plan for the State
Highway Route 5 corridor.
ANALYSIS : Existing law:
1. Provides that the Department of Transportation
(Caltrans) has full possession and control of the state
highway system.
2. Imposes various requirements for the development and
implementation of transportation projects.
3. Authorizes SANDAG to conduct, administer, and operate a
value pricing high-occupancy toll lane program on two
corridors included in the high-occupancy vehicle lane
system in San Diego County.
This bill:
CONTINUED
SB 468
Page
3
1. Makes findings and declarations regarding issues related
to development of the NCCP in the coastal zone.
2. Defines key terms, including:
A. "8+4 Buffer Alternative" to mean the addition of a
multimodal managed lane facility consisting of two
lanes on either side of Interstate 5 (I-5) within the
North Coast Corridor, separated from general purpose
lanes and, to the maximum extent feasible, built
within existing rights-of-way owned by the Caltrans.
High-occupancy vehicles (HOVs), vanpools, and one or
more bus rapid transit routes will have priority in
the managed lanes. Furthermore, value pricing
techniques will allow single-occupant vehicles to use
the facility by paying a toll, as long as
single-occupant vehicle use does not negatively
impact the transit uses of the managed lanes; the 8+4
buffer alternative is one of the five different
alternatives identified in the draft environmental
impact report/draft environmental impact statement
for the expansion of vehicle capacity on I-5; and,
B. "Public works plan" to mean a plan that allows for
an integrated regulatory review by the California
Coastal Commission (Commission) rather than a
project-by-project approval approach.
3. Provides that a public works plan approved for the NCCP
within the coastal zone must include all of the elements
of the project to be carried out by Caltrans or the
SANDAG, including projects related to coastal access,
highway, transit, multimodal transportation, community
enhancement, and environmental restoration and
mitigation; sets forth specific conditions that the
public works plan must satisfy.
4. Provides that once the public works plan for the NCCP
has been approved and certified by the Commission,
subsequent review by the Commission for specific
projects will be limited to imposing conditions
necessary to ensure consistency with the public works
plan.
CONTINUED
SB 468
Page
4
5. Sets forth comprehensive requirements that the public
works plan must satisfy, including providing a process
for obtaining coastal development permits, identifying
specific project elements, and establishing mitigation
measures to be undertaken by SANDAG and Caltrans.
6. Requires Caltrans and SANDAG, for all elements of the
NCCP that are in the coastal zone, to comply with
specific requirements, including:
A. Collaborate with stakeholders;
B. Establish a safe routes to transit program;
C. Recommend an alternative no larger than the 8+4
buffer alternative as the preferred alternative for
I-5 improvements;
D. Plan and construct concurrent lagoon crossings,
unless construction in phases will result in
environmentally superior alternative to concurrent
construction;
E. Construct concurrent highway and transit projects;
and,
F. Use revenue from the voter-approved transaction
and use tax, commonly referred to as TransNet, to
fund improvements on the Los Angeles-San Diego-San
Luis Obispo rail corridor.
7. Directs the Commission, Caltrans, and SANDAG to work
cooperatively toward completing all design reviews,
determinations, and permitting for the NCCP.
8. Makes legislative findings that the Commission's role in
this project is to apply a regional or statewide
perspective and authorizes a streamlined process related
to local coastal programs.
9. Sets forth other parameters to guide the project through
the environmental process.
CONTINUED
SB 468
Page
5
10.Requires Caltrans to suspend any notice of determination
issued this calendar year until the project's
environmental documents are deemed consistent with
provisions of this bill.
11.Provides that this bill's provisions are not to be
construed to supersede or in any way lessen the effect
or application of the California Coastal Act or to
narrow the authority of the Commission to resolve policy
conflicts.
12.Authorizes SANDAG to conduct, administer, and operate a
value pricing and transit development program in the I-5
corridor; directs any excess revenue to be used directly
in the I-5 corridor exclusively for the improvement of
transit service and for HOV facilities.
Background
Caltrans is responsible for the development, operations,
maintenance, and reconstruction of state highways, and it
also plans and operates through contracts with Amtrak,
California's intercity passenger rail service. When
Caltrans develops capacity increasing projects, it usually
carries out this activity in concert with the regional
transportation planning agency for the area in which the
project is located.
SANDAG is the regional transportation planning agency for
the County of San Diego, a single county planning region.
SANDAG is responsible for long-term, multi-modal
transportation planning, the prioritization transportation
projects, and developing fundable transportation capital
outlay program. SANDAG also oversees the operation of
public transportation services in the county.
The Commission, established by voter initiative in 1972
(Proposition 20) and later made permanent when the
Legislature adopted the California Coastal Act of 1976, is
a 12 member, independent, quasi-judicial state agency with
regulatory responsibility for permitting projects
constructed in the coastal zone. It oversees the
implementation of various policies that address issues such
as shoreline public access and recreation, lower cost
CONTINUED
SB 468
Page
6
visitor accommodations, terrestrial and marine habitat
protection, visual resources, landform alteration,
agricultural lands, commercial fisheries, industrial uses,
water quality, offshore oil and gas development,
transportation investments, development design, power
plants, ports, and public works. The Coastal Act
establishes a band along the state's coastline that varies
in width from several hundred feet in urban areas to as
much as five miles inland in rural areas of the state,
which constitutes the jurisdiction of the Commission.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, this
bill will likely result in the need for additional upfront
resources at Caltrans (likely exceeding $150,000) for
coordination activities related to completion of the public
works plan. Caltrans would also incur costs of around
$100,000 to support development of the mandated safe routes
to transit program. To the extent the framework and
processes established in this bill help to expedite
individual projects over the life of the NCCP, the state
should realize significant administrative and capital
outlay cost savings.
Any costs to the Commission should be absorbable.
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/30/11)
Associated General Contractors
California Coastal Commission
California State Council of Laborers
Move San Diego
Planning and Conservation League
San Diego Association of Governments
San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The author introduced this bill in
response to the proposed widening of I-5 in San Diego
County. This bill applies to the entire coastal zone, but
the most significant highway project is the San Diego
project. In November 2010, the Senate Transportation and
Housing Committee held an informational hearing on the
CONTINUED
SB 468
Page
7
project, which over 200 people attended, in Solana Beach, a
city in the NCCP area. Caltrans, SANDAG, and the chair of
the Air Resources Board participated.
In comments to Caltrans on the I-5 draft environmental
impact report (DEIR), the author wrote: "Simply proposing
to construct wider freeways to get us through the next 40
years will not do when the level of service would not be
improved to a significant level. The public clearly wants
realistic transit options and is committed to reducing
greenhouse gas emissions, as evidence by the strong vote in
November, 2010, rejecting Proposition 23 that would have
suspended implementation of AB 32 in California".
The initiation and development of highway projects is a
joint effort between Caltrans and the local regional
transportation planning agency, SANDAG in the case of
improvements to I-5 in San Diego. I-5 is an important
interregional and intracounty highway. Currently, about
200,000 vehicles use the highway on a daily basis, and
SANDAG forecasts in 2030 that usage will increase to
300,000 vehicles, a 50 percent increase. Caltrans and
SANDAG initiated defining various freeway improvement
options in late 1997, with Caltrans approving the actual
project alternatives in January, 2000. The environmental
analysis of the project alternatives began in 2004. Today,
the travel time during commute hours from end-to-end of the
27 mile corridor is 38 minutes. If no improvements are
made, SANDAG forecasts the travel time to be 70 minutes in
2030. On the other hand, if a 14-lane freeway (10
conventional lanes and for managed lanes) is constructed,
the travel time will be 37 minutes, while constructing a
twelve lane freeway, travel time will increase to 45
minutes. The passenger rail service is expected to offer
32 minute service.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 61-16, 9/8/11
AYES: Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, Block,
Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan,
Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos, Carter, Cedillo,
Chesbro, Cook, Davis, Dickinson, Eng, Feuer, Fletcher,
Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani, Gatto, Gordon, Hagman,
Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Roger Hernández, Hill, Huber,
CONTINUED
SB 468
Page
8
Hueso, Huffman, Jeffries, Lara, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Miller, Mitchell, Monning, Norby, Pan, Perea, V.
Manuel Pérez, Portantino, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio,
Swanson, Torres, Wagner, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada,
John A. Pérez
NOES: Achadjian, Bill Berryhill, Donnelly, Beth Gaines,
Grove, Halderman, Jones, Knight, Logue, Mansoor, Morrell,
Nestande, Nielsen, Olsen, Silva, Valadao
NO VOTE RECORDED: Conway, Garrick, Gorell
CTW:kc 9/9/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED