BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 731
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 731 (Steinberg)
As Amended September 6, 2013
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :39-0
NATURAL RESOURCES 6-1 LOCAL GOVERNMENT 7-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Chesbro, Garcia, |Ayes:|Achadjian, Levine, Alejo, |
| |Muratsuchi, Skinner, | |Bradford, Gordon, Mullin, |
| |Stone, Williams | |Rendon |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Patterson | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 11-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra, | | |
| |Bradford, | | |
| |Ian Calderon, Campos, | | |
| |Eggman, Gomez, Hall, Pan, | | |
| |Quirk, Weber | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Makes various clarifications and revisions to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), including limiting
the scope of review for certain residential, mixed-use, and
commercial "employment center" projects near existing or planned
transit stops. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the Office of Planning and Research (OPR), on or
before July 1, 2014, to propose revisions to the CEQA
Guidelines to establish criteria for determining the
significance of transportation impacts of projects within
"transit priority areas," which may address a project's
vehicle miles traveled, vehicle miles traveled per capita,
automobile trip generation rates, automobile trips generated,
or other metrics that promote the reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions, the development of multimodal transportation
networks, and a diversity of land uses.
SB 731
Page 2
a) Authorizes OPR to also establish criteria for models
used in determining these impacts in order to be sure the
models are accurate, reliable, and consistent with the
intent of this section.
b) Provides that automobile delay, as described solely by
level of service or similar measures of capacity or
congestion within a transit priority area, shall not
support a finding of significance pursuant to CEQA once
these guidelines are certified.
c) Defines "transit priority area" as an area within
one-half mile of a major transit stop that is either
existing or planned, if the planned stop is scheduled to be
completed within the planning horizon of a specified
federal transportation plan.
d) Provides that aesthetic and parking impacts of projects
subject to this section shall not be considered significant
impacts on the environment for purposes of CEQA, while also
stating that the authority of a lead agency to consider
aesthetic impacts pursuant to local design review
ordinances or other discretionary powers in not affected.
2)Amends the Congestion Management Act (Government Code Section
65088, et seq.) to expand the definition of "infill
opportunity zone" to include areas within one-half mile of an
existing or planned major transit stop (to be consistent with
the definition of "transit priority area" in this bill), and
authorize a city or county to designate an infill opportunity
zone (currently subject to a December 31, 2009, sunset and
other limiting conditions), for the purpose of obtaining an
exemption from the application of "level of service standards"
(LOS, a threshold that defines a deficiency on the congestion
management program highway and roadway system which requires
the preparation of a deficiency plan). The effect of these
provisions is to reinstate prior law allowing local
governments to opt out of LOS requirements in infill areas.
3)Requires OPR to propose by July 1, 2015, and the Secretary of
the Natural Resources Agency to adopt by January 1, 2016,
revisions to the CEQA Guidelines establishing criteria for a
lead agency to assess the need for translating specified CEQA
notices into non-English languages.
SB 731
Page 3
4)Clarifies, for purposes of the existing exemption for a
residential development project that is consistent with a
specific plan for which an EIR has been prepared, that "new
information" which would invalidate the exemption does not
include "argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or
narrative, evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous,
or evidence of social or economic impacts that do not
contribute to, or are not caused by, physical impacts on the
environment" (making the meaning of "new information"
consistent with the existing meaning of "substantial evidence"
in CEQA).
5)Requires, when a public agency finds that specific economic,
legal, social, technological, or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified
in the EIR and finds that specific overriding economic, legal,
social, technological, or other benefits of the project
outweigh the significant effects on the environment, that the
agency's findings be published for review for at least 10 days
prior to approval of the project, and provides specified
procedures for publication and transmittal to specified
parties.
6)Authorize the procedures of the Ralph M. Brown Act to be
substituted for the above 10-day notice requirement
(effectively reducing the notice requirement to three days).
7)Requires a lead agency to prepare and publish a report on a
project's compliance with mitigation measures adopted pursuant
to CEQA, upon request of a member of the public.
8)Provides that the statute of limitations for bringing a CEQA
lawsuit may be tolled for successive periods up to four years
each by agreement of the parties (petitioner, public agency
and real party in interest/applicant).
9)For certain projects and upon a project applicant's request,
authorizes a lead agency to prepare concurrently with the
administrative process the record of proceedings that would be
used in a judicial challenge to an agency's action or decision
under CEQA. Specifies procedures for preparation and
publication of the record. Requires the project applicant to
reimburse the lead agency for the costs incurred to prepare
the record. Applies to projects determined to be of
SB 731
Page 4
statewide, regional, or area-wide environmental significance;
infill projects for which an EIR was certified for a city or
county's planning level decision; a project implementing a
sustainable communities strategy pursuant to SB 375
(Steinberg), Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008; or any other
project for which the lead agency consents to prepare the
record of proceedings pursuant to the above requirements.
10)Requires the California Research Bureau, subject to the
availability of funds, to report annually to the Legislature
regarding CEQA lawsuits, including the parties involved, the
type of action and violation alleged, and the disposition of
the case.
11)Requires, when a court finds that a public agency has not
complied with CEQA, that the court issue a peremptory writ of
mandate specifying what action is necessary to comply.
Requires the writ include only those mandates necessary to
achieve compliance and only those project activities in
noncompliance, and permits a writ to direct the agency to
revise only those portions of a CEQA document found not to be
in compliance, provided the non-compliant issues are severable
from the remainder of the project.
12)Declares the intent of the Legislature to appropriate $30
million to the Strategic Growth Council to provide competitive
grants to local agencies for planning activities related to
implementing SB 375.
13)Authorizes the applicant for a project, including a renewable
energy project, to present to the public agency the onsite or
offsite benefits of the project.
14)Establishes, until January 1, 2017, the position of "Advisor
on Renewable Energy Facilities" in the office of the Governor.
15)Declares the intent of the Legislature regarding CEQA issues
addressed in the operative provisions of the bill.
16)Titles the bill the "CEQA Modernization Act of 2013."
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires, under CEQA, lead agencies with the principal
SB 731
Page 5
responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed
project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative
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).
2)Requires an EIR to identify and analyze:
a) Significant effects on the environment that would occur
if the project is approved, unless the agency finds that
alternatives to the project or mitigation measures would
address the effects, or specific overriding economic,
legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the
project outweigh them.
b) Cumulative impacts of a project when, considered in the
context of environmental change occurring over time, the
incremental effect is cumulatively considerable.
3)Exempts from CEQA specified residential housing projects which
meet criteria established to ensure the project does not have
a significant effect on the environment, including urban
infill housing projects not more than 100 units on a site not
more than four acres in size which is within one-half mile of
a major transit stop. (SB 1925 (Sher), Chapter 1039, Statutes
of 2002)
4)Establishes abbreviated CEQA review procedures for specified
infill projects, where only specific or more significant
effects on the environment which were not addressed in a prior
planning-level EIR need be addressed. An EIR for such a
project need not consider alternative locations, densities,
and building intensities or growth-inducing impacts. Infill
projects may include residential, retail, commercial, transit
station, school, or public office building projects located
within an urban area. Requires OPR to develop CEQA
guidelines, including statewide standards to promote smart
growth, reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, reduction
in water use, energy efficiency improvements and protection of
public health. (SB 226 (Simitian), Chapter 469, Statutes of
2011)
5)Requires metropolitan planning organizations to include a
sustainable communities strategy (SCS), as defined, in their
SB 731
Page 6
regional transportation plans, or an alternative planning
strategy (APS), for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions,
aligns planning for transportation and housing, and creates
specified incentives for the implementation of the strategies,
including CEQA exemption or abbreviated review for eligible
residential projects. (SB 375 (Steinberg), Chapter 728,
Statutes of 2008)
6)Authorizes judicial review of CEQA actions taken by public
agencies, following the agency's decision to carry out or
approve the project. Challenges alleging improper
determination that a project may have a significant effect on
the environment, or alleging an EIR does not comply with CEQA,
must be filed in the Superior Court within 30 days of filing
of the notice of approval.
7)Establishes that a record of proceeding includes, but is not
limited to, all application materials, staff reports,
transcripts or minutes of public proceedings, notices, written
comments, and written correspondence prepared by or submitted
to the public agency regarding the proposed project.
Establishes a procedure for the preparation, certification,
and lodging of the record of proceedings.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, one-time General Fund (GF) costs to OPR of
approximately $500,000 to develop threshold standards for noise,
transportation, and parking impacts. Ongoing GF costs of
approximately $120,000 for the creation of the Advisor on
Renewable Energy Facilities within the Office of the Governor.
GF cost pressure of $30 million for local assistance grants for
planning activities administered by the Strategic Growth
Council. Unknown cost pressures for the California Research
Bureau to report annually.
COMMENTS : CEQA provides a process for evaluating the
environmental effects of applicable projects undertaken or
approved by public agencies. If a project is not exempt from
CEQA, an initial study is prepared to determine whether the
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. A lead agency must base its
SB 731
Page 7
determination of significant effects on substantial evidence.
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.
According to the author's office, this bill is a comprehensive
reform measure to strengthen CEQA's protection of the state's
environment and residents while modernizing the law to aid
California's economic growth. The author states, "today's bill
is the result of months of discussion and negotiation with key
representatives from the business, environmental, and organized
labor communities." These changes were key issues identified by
a CEQA working group of experts brought together by Senator
Steinberg this past fall. The author states, "taken together
they will help reduce litigation and delays from CEQA while
protecting the legitimate uses of the statute."
Analysis Prepared by : Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092
FN: 0002641