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