BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 417|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 417
Author: Frazier (D)
Amended: 6/13/13 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE : 9-0, 6/26/13
AYES: Hill, Gaines, Calderon, Corbett, Fuller, Hancock,
Jackson, Leno, Pavley
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : Senate Rule 28.8
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 70-2, 4/25/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : California Environmental Quality Act: Bicycle
Transportation Plan
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill exempts from the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), until January 1, 2018, a bicycle
transportation plan prepared for an urbanized area for
restriping of streets and highways, bicycle parking and storage,
signal timing to improve street and highway intersection
operations, and related signage for bicycles, pedestrians, and
vehicles.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
CONTINUED
AB 417
Page
2
1.Under CEQA:
A. Requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility
for carrying out or approving a proposed discretionary
project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated
declaration, or environmental impact report (EIR) for this
action, unless the project is exempt from CEQA (CEQA
includes various statutory exemptions, as well as
categorical exemptions in the CEQA guidelines). If there
is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record
before a lead agency, that a project may have a significant
effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare a
draft EIR.
B. Contains specified exemptions relating to bicycle
facilities.
1.Under the California Bicycle Transportation Act, authorizes a
city or county to prepare a bicycle transportation plan, which
must include certain elements (e.g., proposed land use and
settlement patterns, existing proposed bikeways and bicycle
facilities, bicycle safety and education facilities, project
priorities for implementation, past expenditures and future
financial needs).
This bill:
1.Requires, prior to determining that a project is exempt
pursuant to this bill, the lead agency to do the following:
A. Hold public hearings in affected areas; and
B. Prepare an assessment of any traffic and safety impacts
of the project and include measures in the bicycle
transportation plan to mitigate potential vehicular, and
bicycle and pedestrian safety impacts.
1.Requires a local agency, which determines that a project is
exempt pursuant to this bill and determines to approve the
project, to file notice of the determination with the Office
of Planning and Research and with the county in which the
project is located.
2.Sunsets the exemption for a bicycle transportation plan on
CONTINUED
AB 417
Page
3
January 1, 2018.
3.Provides that for an exempted project that consists of the
restriping of streets and highways for bicycle lanes in an
urbanized area pursuant to existing law, the lead agency is
not required to prepare an assessment of any traffic or safety
impacts of the project if either of the following conditions
are met:
A. Mitigation measures are identified in the CEQA
environmental review document for the bicycle
transportation plan that is certified or approved within
the past five years and those measures are incorporated
into the project; or
B. An assessment was prepared pursuant to this bill within
the past five years, mitigation measures are included in
the plan, and those measures are incorporated into the
project.
Background
CEQA provides a process for evaluating the environmental effects
of a project, and includes statutory exemptions, as well as
categorical exemptions in the CEQA guidelines. If a project is
not exempt from CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine
whether a project may have a significant effect on the
environment. If the initial study shows that there would not be
a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency must
prepare a negative declaration. If the initial study shows that
the project may have a significant effect on the environment,
the lead agency must prepare an EIR.
Generally, an EIR must accurately describe the proposed project,
identify and analyze each significant environmental impact
expected to result from the proposed project, identify
mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to the extent
feasible, and evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives to the
proposed project. Prior to approving any project that has
received environmental review, an agency must make certain
findings. If mitigation measures are required or incorporated
into a project, the agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring
program to ensure compliance with those measures.
If a mitigation measure would cause one or more significant
CONTINUED
AB 417
Page
4
effects in addition to those that would be caused by the
proposed project, the effects of the mitigation measure must be
discussed but in less detail than the significant effects of the
proposed project.
San Francisco bicycle plan litigation . The San Francisco Board
of Supervisors adopted the 2005 Bicycle Plan (Plan) on June 7,
2005, and determined that the plan was exempt from CEQA because
there was no possibility that it would have significant impacts
on the environment. The San Francisco County Transportation
Authority Commission (composed exclusively of members of the
board of supervisors) adopted the bicycle plan's "Network
Improvement Document" (Document), a five-year plan for funding
and implementing the Bicycle Plan on June 21, 2005.
Petitioners challenged the adoption of the Document under CEQA
and the Court granted the petitioner's petition finding the Plan
and Document should have been reviewed pursuant to CEQA together
as one project - and that considered as a whole could have a
significant impact on the environment. The Court issued a
Preemptory Writ of Mandate on June 18, 2007, requiring San
Francisco to conduct adequate environmental review of the Plan
and Document, and enjoined the city from implementing any
individual improvement projects until the review was completed.
San Francisco planning department published a draft EIR on
November 26, 2008. According to the Court, "The bulk of the
Draft EIR's analysis concerned impacts on transportation,
particularly impacts from the 60 near-term improvements on 63
different intersections located throughout San Francisco, as
well as impacts on 12 'transit corridors,' 10 transit 'spot
studies,' and 13 parking and loading corridors." The Court also
noted that the EIR identified mitigation measures to minimize or
eliminate many of the significant environmental impacts
identified in the EIR, including measures such as adding or
modifying traffic signals at intersections (lengthening green
light time or adding a green arrow), modifying roadway striping
(changing shared lanes to exclusive turn lanes, narrowing
traffic lanes, or eliminating or restricting on-street parking).
The Planning Commission certified the EIR on June 25, 2009; the
MTA Board of Directors adopted the 2009 Bicycle Plan and
approved the traffic changes necessary to implement 45 of the 60
improvements, and made the required CEQA findings. The
CONTINUED
AB 417
Page
5
petitioners appealed the Planning Commissioner's certification
of the EIR to the Board of Supervisors on July 15, 2009; and the
Board of Supervisors heard the appeals on August 4, 2009, and
denied the appeals. The city filed a Notice of Determination on
August 14, 2009, and filed a return to the Writ of Mandate on
September 18, 2009, to which the petitioners objected. The
Court found that the city complied with CEQA and the court's
order to conduct environmental review of the Bicycle Plan,
including its policies and goals and individual improvement
projects on August 6, 2010. The main criticism heard about the
San Francisco case is that one petitioner had the power to delay
something good from happening for several years.
Prior Legislation
SB 1380 (Rubio, 2012) would have exempted from CEQA bicycle
transportation plans developed for urbanized areas. The bill
was approved by the Senate Environmental Quality Committee April
30, 2012 (6-0) but died on the Assembly Floor Inactive File.
AB 2245 (Smyth, Chapter 680, Statutes of 2012) exempts from CEQA
a project that consists of restriping of streets and highways
for bicycle lanes in an urbanized area that is consistent with a
city or county bicycle transportation plan.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/9/13)
California Bicycle Coalition
Civil Justice Association of California
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
Orange County Transportation Authority
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/9/13)
Sierra Club California
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 70-2, 4/25/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chávez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley,
Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fox, Frazier, Beth
CONTINUED
AB 417
Page
6
Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Grove,
Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hernández, Holden, Jones,
Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor,
Medina, Melendez, Mitchell, Morrell, Mullin, Muratsuchi,
Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez,
Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Torres, Wagner, Waldron,
Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, John A. Pérez
NOES: Stone, Yamada
NO VOTE RECORDED: Ammiano, Blumenfield, Fong, Lowenthal,
Nazarian, Quirk, Ting, Vacancy
RM:ej 8/12/13 Senate Floor Analyses
**** END ****
CONTINUED