BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 157
Page 1
Date of Hearing: March 23, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Jim Frazier, Chair
AB
157 (Levine) - As Introduced January 20, 2015
SUBJECT: Richmond-San Rafael Bridge
SUMMARY: Requires environmental review to be completed
concurrent with design work for a project to open a third lane
in each direction on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, under
certain conditions. Specifically, this bill:
1)Makes legislative findings and declarations regarding the
history of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and of a planned
project to improve traffic flow on the bridge by re-opening a
third lane to vehicle traffic in the eastbound direction and
to bicycle traffic in the westbound direction.
2)Requires, to the extent possible, environmental work and
design work be done concurrently on the project if the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) develop
such a project.
3)Includes urgency provisions.
EXISTING LAW:
AB 157
Page 2
1)Created MTC as a local area planning agency to provide
comprehensive regional transportation planning for the region
comprised of the City and County of San Francisco and the
Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Mateo,
Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma.
2)Created the Bay Area Toll Authority (BATA) as a public
instrumentality governed by the same board as that governing
the MTC. The authority is, however, a separate entity from the
MTC.
3)Vests with the BATA the responsibility to administer all toll
revenues from state-owned toll bridges within the geographic
jurisdiction of the MTC.
4)Requires state and local agencies, pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to identify significant
environmental impacts of discretionary projects and to avoid
or mitigate those impacts, if feasible; requires lead agencies
to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated negative
declaration, or environmental impact report (EIR) for the
project.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: The Richmond-San Rafael Bridge originally opened in
1956 with three lanes of vehicular traffic in each direction.
In the 1970s, one lane of the bridge was temporarily closed to
allow for an aqueduct to transport water to a drought-stricken
Marin. Even though the aqueduct was later removed, the bridge
continues to operate with two traffic lanes in each direction.
The author introduced this bill to address growing concerns
about congestion delays in the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge
corridor. According to BATA, regional population growth and
AB 157
Page 3
local business developments in Marin County have resulted in
significant traffic increases on eastbound Interstate 580
(I-580) and the bridge approach during evening peak commute
periods. BATA also reports that the congestion in the bridge
corridor backs up traffic on northbound US 101 in Marin County.
In addition to traffic congestion, the current configuration on
the bridge (two-lanes in each direction) does not allow for
bicycle and pedestrian facilities. As a result, there is a
significant gap in the 270-mile Bay Trail, reportedly one of the
most heavily used recreation and non-motorized transportation
assets in the region.
Last month, BATA voted to proceed with the I-580 Access
Improvement Project. The project includes improvements for
motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians in the Richmond-San
Rafael Bridge corridor. Proposed improvements include opening a
third lane of vehicular traffic in the eastbound direction of
I-580 from Marin County to Contra Costa County (across the
bridge) and converting an existing shoulder in the westbound
direction of the bridge to a barrier-separated path for
bicyclists and pedestrians.
BATA's February action authorized its staff to proceed with a
"design-at-risk" strategy (i.e., begin design in advance of
environmental clearance) to shorten the timeframe for opening
all improvements. BATA's stated goal is to complete the final
design and be able to advertise for construction at the
completion of the environmental review.
According to the author, the design-at-risk strategy will
expedite completion of the project by as much as 18 months.
Committee concerns:
AB 157
Page 4
1)The author's stated intent with the bill is to speed
completion of the project by proceeding with the
design-at-risk strategy. However, since BATA is already
pursuing this approach, it is not clear why the bill is
necessary to expedite the project.
2)Typically, the goal of an EIR process is to evaluate project
alternatives with the aim of avoiding or minimizing impacts to
the environment. Most lead agencies are careful to complete
this process before beginning design work. One advantage for
doing so is to avoid inviting a legal challenge that the EIR
is inadequate because the outcome was pre-determined and
therefore biased.
Agencies do, however, occasionally proceed with design prior
to completion of the EIR, just as BATA has with the I-580
Access Improvement Project. Arguably, it may make sound
business sense for an agency to proceed with a design-at-risk
strategy when, for example, the number of alternatives is
limited and the project schedule needs to be accelerated.
The author indicates that his intent in introducing this bill
is to specifically ensure that BATA has clear authority to
proceed with the design-at-risk strategy. However, this bill
goes beyond authorizing a design-risk strategy by, instead,
mandating that BATA use this strategy if it pursues this
project. In so doing, this bill could effectively absolve
BATA of legal risks related to pre-determining the outcome of
its EIR, a consequence that goes beyond the author's stated
intent and one for which there is no justification presented
as to why BATA should uniquely enjoy this protection.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees,
AB 157
Page 5
AFL-CIO
Bay Area Council
Marin County Board of Supervisors
State Building & Construction Trades Council
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Janet Dawson/TRANS./(916) 319-2093