BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Senator Wieckowski, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 157
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Levine |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
|Version: |6/25/2015 |Hearing |7/15/2015 |
| | |Date: | |
|-----------+-----------------------+-------------+----------------|
|Urgency: |Yes |Fiscal: |No |
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Joanne Roy |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Richmond-San Rafael Bridge
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1) Under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA),
requires federal agencies to assess the environmental effects
of their proposed actions prior to making decisions. Actions
include making decisions on permit applications, adopting
federal land management actions, and constructing highways
and other publicly-owned facilities. (42 United States Code
§4321 et seq.).
2) 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). (Public Resources Code (PRC) §21000 et seq.).
3) States, "The environmental document preparation and review
should be coordinated in a timely fashion with the existing
planning, review, and project approval processes being used
by each public agency. These procedures, to the maximum
extent feasible, are to run concurrently, not consecutively,
when included as part of the regular project report if such a
report is used in its existing review and budgetary process."
(CEQA Guidelines §15004(c)).
AB 157 (Levine) Page 2
of ?
4) Provides that public agencies should reduce delay and
paperwork by integrating the CEQA process into early
planning. (CEQA Guidelines §15006).
5) Creates the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (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. (Government Code §66500 et seq.).
6) Creates 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. (Streets and Highways Code §30950).
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) Authorizes, to the extent possible, environmental work and
design work be done concurrently on the project if the MTC
and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
develop such a project.
3) Includes an urgency clause in order to open the third lane of
the bridge to traffic at the earliest possible date.
Background
1) NEPA. NEPA was one of the first laws ever written that
establishes the broad national framework for protecting the
environment. NEPA's basic policy is to assure that all
AB 157 (Levine) Page 3
of ?
branches of government give proper consideration to the
environment prior to undertaking major federal action that
significantly affects the environment. NEPA requirements are
invoked when airports, buildings, military complexes,
highways, parkland purchases, and other federal activities
are proposed. Environmental Assessments and Environmental
Impact Statements, which are assessments of the likelihood of
impacts from alternative courses of action, are required from
all federal agencies.
2) CEQA: Environmental review process. 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, then 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 an 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
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.
3) CEQA: What is analyzed in an environmental review? Pursuant
to CEQA, an environmental review analyzing the significant
direct and indirect environmental impacts of a proposed
project, may include water quality, surface and subsurface
AB 157 (Levine) Page 4
of ?
hydrology, land use and agricultural resources,
transportation and circulation, air quality and greenhouse
gas emissions, terrestrial and aquatic biological resources,
aesthetics, geology and soils, recreation, public services
and utilities such as water supply and wastewater disposal,
cultural resources, and tribal cultural resources.
The analysis must also evaluate the cumulative impacts of any
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects/activities
within study areas that are applicable to the resources being
evaluated. A study area for a proposed project must not be
limited to the footprint of the project because many
environmental impacts of a development extend beyond the
identified project boundary. Also, CEQA stipulates that the
environmental impacts must be measured against existing
physical conditions within the project area, not future,
allowable conditions.
4) Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. 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.
Comments
1) Purpose of Bill. According to the author, "Traffic gridlock
on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge is one of the worst in the
Bay Area. The Richmond-San Rafael Bridge was originally
constructed and operated with six 12-foot wide lanes, three
in the eastbound and three in the westbound directions.
Third lane was closed in 1977 to allow for a pipeline to
transport water during drought. Since that time the third
lane has been used as an emergency should with the exception
of the month following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake when
the lane was opened to help ease traffic across the bay from
the closure of the Bay Bridge.
"Performing the design work simultaneously with the
environmental work will expedite the Richmond-San Rafael
AB 157 (Levine) Page 5
of ?
third lane project by as much as 18 months. This bill makes
clear that the design work can be done concurrently with the
environmental review."
2) Congestion. 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 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. The project proposes to
convert the shoulder along the span's lower deck (eastbound
direction) to a peak-period lane to relieve traffic
congestion.
3) Bicycle and pedestrians. 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
gap in the 270-mile Bay Trail, which is reportedly one of the
most heavily used recreation and non-motorized transportation
assets in the region. The project will install a concrete
barrier system on the upper deck (westbound direction) of the
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge to convert the existing freeway
shoulder to a barrier-separated path for bicycles and
pedestrians.
4) What's the plan? In February, 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.
AB 157 (Levine) Page 6
of ?
By overlapping elements of the process, CalTrans states that
1- 1 years have been shaved off the timeline of this
project. Originally construction was expected to start in
2017; and complete and open to traffic the third lane in late
2018. With the accelerated schedule underway, CalTrans plans
to start construction in 2016 and open the third lane to
traffic in late 2017.
5) Potential public safety issue with third lane. Part of the
project area curves and has a retaining wall. The proposed
third lane would be located on the inside of the curve - this
poses a potential safety issue because of the limited line of
sight. For example, a car stalls on the far end of the curve
in the third lane; but cars approaching the stalled car from
behind may not be able to see the stalled car, due to the
curve, and end up crashing into it. One of the issues
analyzed in a CEQA environmental review related to
transportation/traffic is whether a project substantially
increases hazards due to design feature, such as sharp
curves. The traffic study has not been completed yet. Is it
prudent to encourage the expedition of the environmental
review process considering there is a known, potentially
significant hazard to public safety?
6) NEPA. Because the highway is part of the federal Interstate
system, environmental approval is not only required pursuant
to CEQA, but to NEPA as well. For purposes of NEPA, the
project must be in the Metropolitan Planning Organization's
conforming Regional Transportation Plan and Transportation
Improvement Program. The Richmond-San Rafael Bridge project
is not currently in these planning documents. The purpose of
this bill is meant to expedite the project. However, this
bill does not have any effect on mandates required at the
federal level and would not speed up the NEPA environmental
review process. A question arises as to whether this bill
would actually bring the project to the construction phase
more quickly considering this project is subject to NEPA as
well as CEQA.
7) Is this bill necessary? This bill authorizes, to the extent
possible, environmental work and design work to be done
concurrently on this project. CEQA Guidelines 15004(c)
states, "The environmental document preparation and review
AB 157 (Levine) Page 7
of ?
should be coordinated in a timely fashion with the existing
planning, review, and project approval processes being used
by each public agency. These procedures, to the maximum
extent feasible, are to run concurrently, not consecutively,
when included as part of the regular project report if such a
report is used in its existing review and budgetary process."
In addition, CEQA Guidelines 15006 states, "Public agencies
should reduce delay and paperwork by?[i]ntegrating the CEQA
process into early planning."
In general, CalTrans, which is the lead agency for this project,
states that environmental studies begin when it has enough
information to begin studies. Depending on each project,
this could begin when 10% to 20% of the design exists.
The purpose of this bill is to make clear that design and
environmental review can be done concurrently. However, a
question arises as to whether current law and practice
already serve the purpose of this bill.
DOUBLE REFERRAL:
This measure was heard in Senate Transportation & Housing
Committee on July 7, 2015, and passed out of committee with a
vote of 11-0.
SOURCE: Author
SUPPORT:
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
Bay Area Council
Marin County Board of Supervisors
Marin County Council of Mayors and Councilmembers
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
OPPOSITION:
Sierra Club California
-- END --
AB 157 (Levine) Page 8
of ?