BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 417 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 17, 2013 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Mike Gatto, Chair AB 417 (Frazier) - As Introduced: February 15, 2013 Policy Committee: Natural ResourcesVote:7-1 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: SUMMARY As proposed to be amended, this bill creates an exemption to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the approval of urban bicycle transportation plans. 1) Prior to determining if the plan is exempt under CEQA, this bill specifically requires the lead agency approving the plan to do the following: a) Hold noticed public hearings in areas affected by the bicycle transportation plan to hear and respond to public comments. b) Include measures in the bicycle transportation plan to mitigate potential vehicular traffic impacts. c) Include measures in the bicycle transportation plan to mitigate potential bicycle and pedestrian safety impacts. 2)This bill requires the local agency granting the CEQA exemption to file a notice of determination with the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the clerk of the county in which the project is located. 3)This bill sunsets January 1, 2018. FISCAL EFFECT Absorbable costs to OPR. AB 417 Page 2 COMMENTS 1)Purpose. This bill provides an alternative environmental and public review process for the approval of urban bicycle plans. According to the author, by reducing vehicle traffic, bicycle lanes have significant environmental benefits including air quality improvements and greenhouse gas reductions, while also providing better safety for bicycle riders. This bill will reduce delays and the likelihood that public money will be spent defending legal challenges under CEQA. 2)Background. CEQA provides a process for evaluating the environmental effects of applicable projects approved or undertaken by public agencies. For projects that are not exempt from CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine if the projects may have a significant impact on the environment. If the initial study shows no significant impacts, a negative declaration is issued. If the project may significantly impact the environment, a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared, including the identification of environmental impacts and required mitigation, compliance and reporting measures intended to reduce the environmental impacts to the extent feasible. CEQA also provides for public process and legal challenges. 3)SF 2005 Bicycle Plan. The City and County of San Francisco adopted a bicycle plan and determined the plan was exempt from CEQA because, in the city's view, the activities associated with the plan did not trigger CEQA review. The City concurrently adopted the Network Improvement Plan, a five-year plan for funding and implementing the bicycle plan. Petitioners challenged both the Bicycle Plan and The Network Improvement Plan successfully under CEQA. The court found that the both plans should have been reviewed together as one project, as the two actions together could have a significant impact on the environment. The city was ordered to prepare an EIR. The court ultimately determined that the EIR met the requirements of CEQA. As a result, San Francisco's bicycle plan was delayed and the city spent more public funds than they had originally anticipated. 4)Class II Bikeways . AB 2245 (Smyth) Chapter 680, Statutes of AB 417 Page 3 2012, established a CEQA exemption until January 1, 2018 for specific bike lanes undertaken by state or local government in existing road rights-of way. This exemption requires the lead Agency to file notice of determination with the OPR but does not include the additional requirements to track all the actions and outcomes of noncompliance claims and proceedings. 5)Support. This bill is supported by local entities and cycling organizations who contend that CEQA challenges on local bicycle transportation plans can be expensive and at risk for delay from potential for litigation. 6)Opposition. This bill is opposed by the Sierra Club, who argues the exemption provided by this bill undermines the likelihood the environmental impacts of bicycle plans will be identified, appropriately reviewed and mitigated, if necessary. 7)Author's Amendment. The Author is proposing amendments to delete the OPR requirements to post on its website a link to the plan of each local agency filing a notice of determination for the CEQA exemption and any action or proceeding alleging that a bicycle plan is out of compliance with the requirements of this CEQA exemption, including the cause of the action and the case outcome. Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer Galehouse / APPR. / (916) 319-2081