BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1886
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 3, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Das Williams, Chair
AB 1886
(McCarty) - As Introduced February 11, 2016
SUBJECT: California Environmental Quality Act: transit
priority projects
SUMMARY: Revises the definition of a "transit priority project"
for purposes of qualifying for exemption or abbreviated review
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to permit
up to 50% of the parcels within the project to be farther than
1/2 mile from a major transit stop or high-quality transit
corridor, as defined.
EXISTING LAW:
1)CEQA requires lead agencies with the principal 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 metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to include
a sustainable communities strategy (SCS), as defined, in their
regional transportation plans, or an alternative planning
AB 1886
Page 2
strategy (APS), for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas
(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 residential or mixed-use residential
"transit priority projects," if the project is consistent with
the use designation, density, building intensity, and
applicable policies specified for the project area in either
an approved SCS or APS. [SB 375 (Steinberg), Chapter 728,
Statutes of 2008]
a) Requires a "transit priority project" to meet the
following conditions:
i) Contain at least 50% residential use;
ii) Provide at least 20 dwellings per acre; and
iii) Be within 1/2 mile of a major transit stop or
high-quality transit corridor. To qualify, all parcels
within the project must have no more than 25% of their
area farther than 1/2 mile from transit and not more than
10% of the residential units or 100 units, whichever is
less, may be farther than 1/2 mile from transit.
b) Defines "major transit stop" as a site containing an
existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by
either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection
of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service
interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and
afternoon peak commute periods.
c) Defines "high-quality transit corridor" as a corridor
with fixed route bus service with service intervals no
longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.
AB 1886
Page 3
3)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. [SB 226 (Simitian), Chapter 469,
Statutes of 2011] SB 226 requires the Office of Planning and
Research (OPR) to develop CEQA guidelines to implement its
infill provisions, including statewide standards to promote
smart growth, reduction of GHG emissions, reduction in water
use, energy efficiency improvements, and protection of public
health.
4)Exempts from CEQA residential, mixed-use, and "employment
center" projects, as defined, located in "transit priority
areas" within one-half mile of an existing or planned major
transit stop, if the project is consistent with an adopted
specific plan and specified elements of a SCS or APS adopted
pursuant to SB 375. [SB 743 (Steinberg), Chapter 386,
Statutes of 2013]
5)Exempts from CEQA specified residential housing projects which
meet detailed 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 and not more than 4 acres in size which is within 1/2
mile of a major transit stop. [SB 1925 (Sher), Chapter 1039,
Statutes of 2002]
6)The CEQA Guidelines further exempt infill projects meeting the
following conditions:
a) The project is consistent with the applicable general
plan designation and all applicable general plan policies,
as well as with applicable zoning designation and
AB 1886
Page 4
regulations.
b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a
project site of no more than five acres substantially
surrounded by urban uses.
c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered,
rare, or threatened species.
d) Approval of the project would not result in any
significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air
quality, or water quality.
e) The site can be adequately served by all required
utilities and public services.
THIS BILL revises the definition of a "transit priority project"
for purposes of the SCS provisions of CEQA to permit up to 50%
of the area of parcels within the project to be farther than 1/2
mile from a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor.
FISCAL EFFECT: Non-fiscal
COMMENTS:
1)Background. 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 the project would not have 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, the lead
agency must prepare an EIR.
AB 1886
Page 5
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.
CEQA includes various statutory exemptions, as well as
categorical exemptions in the CEQA Guidelines. Since 1985,
any residential development project can be exempt from CEQA if
the project is consistent with a specific plan for which an
EIR has been certified. In 2002, SB 1925 established CEQA
exemptions for certain residential projects providing
affordable urban or agricultural housing, or located on an
infill site within an urbanized area and meeting specified
unit and acreage criteria. For purposes of qualifying for the
CEQA exemption for urban infill housing, projects must be
within one-half mile of a major transit stop.
More recently, the Legislature has enacted CEQA exemptions and
streamlining for residential and certain other projects in
infill areas. SB 375 (2008) provided a CEQA exemption for a
narrow set of eligible residential projects in infill areas
adjacent to transit, as well as alternatives of abbreviated
EIR and mitigated negative declaration review. SB 226 (2011)
provided abbreviated CEQA review procedures for a broader set
of urban infill projects, including retail, commercial, and
public buildings, with no requirement regarding proximity to
transit. SB 743 (2013) established a new exemption for
residential, mixed-use, and "employment center" projects
located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, if the
project is consistent with an adopted specific plan and
specified elements of a SB 375 strategy. SB 743 also required
AB 1886
Page 6
OPR to propose revisions to the CEQA Guidelines for
transportation impacts to better support infill development.
2)Author's statement:
Past legislative efforts, such as SB 226, SB 375 and SB 743,
have sought to update CEQA by creating exemptions and
streamlining provisions for projects which meet specific
criteria. The goals of those efforts were to maintain the
integrity of CEQA, while recognizing that certain projects do
not require as thorough review as others. These are projects
which must be close to mass transit, promote smart growth
strategies and are environmentally friendly.
These types of development pose significant challenges for both
the developer/builder and for the city looking to approve them.
Infill projects are complicated and face significant threats of
litigation and other hurdles. This is because the nature of
infill means that projects are surrounded by current residents,
business or outside groups who may oppose the project despite
its benefits to both the environment and the community. After
many discussions with the Governor's Office of Planning and
Research, Infill Builders, the City of Sacramento, environmental
and labor groups, we found that the use of a streamlined EIR
(PRC 21155.2) or the CEQA exemption after a public hearing (PRC
21155.1) is an effective way to reduce some of the CEQA burden
on projects, while still maintaining an avenue for objections to
be raised concerning individual projects.
AB 1886
Page 7
A streamlined EIR, as allowed for transit priority projects (PRC
21155.2), is a valuable tool for infill development. It carries
the litigation protection as a full EIR, but is less expensive
and less time consuming. It must still consider environmental
impacts of a proposed project and must go through the public
process for comments or revisions. By changing the requirements
which have access to streamlined EIRs, cities may have the
ability to attract more infill development.
This bill seeks to encourage more environmentally friendly
infill development by making a slight change to PRC 21155 to
allow for more flexibility in project design, while still
remaining within walking distance to high quality transit. It
changes the current requirement of how much of an entire mixed
use or residential infill project of no more than 200
residential units is within a mile from mass transit from 75%
to 50%. This change only affects the non-residential pieces of
a project. Current law would remain the same under this bill,
that 90% of residential units be within mile distance to mass
transit.
3)Three forms of relief. SB 375 provide three alternative forms
of relief for CEQA review of transit priority projects:
a) Exemption (Section 21155.1). This requires a
hearing and findings by the public agency that the
project meets specified criteria, including a variety of
conditions to assure the project has no significant
AB 1886
Page 8
environmental impacts. The project must also be located
within one-half mile of a rail transit station or ferry
terminal, or within one-quarter mile of a high-quality
transit corridor.
b) Sustainable communities environmental assessment
[Section 21155.2(b)]. This is equivalent to a mitigated
negative declaration, except that the lead agency's
actions are subject to a more deferential standard of
review (substantial evidence rather than fair argument).
c) Abbreviated EIR [Section 21155.2(c)]. This limits
the consideration of cumulative impacts and does not
require analysis of off-site alternatives to the project.
4)Opposition argument. Environmental groups opposed to the bill
contend that the half-mile limit is not just about proximity
of transit to housing, but also to jobs and retail:
AB 1886 maintains that no more than 10 percent of the
residential units in the development, or 100 units,
whichever is less, can be located more than one-half mile
away from the transit station. We are pleased to see an
effort to honor the original intent of SB 375, to locate
the majority of residential units in walking distance from
the transit stop. However, we are concerned about the
impacts?on the commercial and retail portions of a project.
A report on Transit Oriented Development published by the
Public Policy Institute of California recommended a greater
emphasis on locating commercial development and jobs near
transit to reduce vehicle miles traveled and promote
transit ridership. If the bulk of the jobs are located too
far from a station for the transit to be a viable commuting
option, this commercial development, while near transit,
AB 1886
Page 9
may not reduce vehicle miles traveled. Moreover, AB 1886
might result in more, larger projects that choose to locate
the full 100 residential units more than one-half mile from
transit, rendering transit a less viable option for these
residents.
5)OPR survey indicates CEQA is not a significant barrier to
infill projects. OPR's "2012 Annual Planning Survey Results"
asked city and county planners to explain the primary barriers
their jurisdictions have experienced to implementing infill
projects. Based on 238 responses, 25% of jurisdictions
reported that infrastructure constraints were a primary
barrier to implementing infill projects. Just under 25%
reported that they had problems with assembling parcels of the
right size and configuration for infill development. Only 4%
of respondents identified CEQA as a barrier.
6)Suggested amendment. The author and the committee may wish to
consider amending the bill to clarify that the changes to the
one-half mile limit do not apply to the exemption (Section
21155.1), which has its own, more-stringent transit proximity
requirements.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Association of Environmental Professionals
California Association of Realtors
AB 1886
Page 10
Opposition
California Bicycle Coalition
California League of Conservation Voters
Natural Resources Defense Council
Safe Routes to School National Partnership
Sierra Club California
Analysis Prepared by:Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092