BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 987|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 987
Author: Ma (D)
Amended: 8/18/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE : 3-1, 6/16/10
AYES: Kehoe, DeSaulnier, Price
NOES: Aanestad
NO VOTE RECORDED: Cox
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 43-29, 1/27/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Transit village development districts
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill expands the maximum size of a transit
village development district from the total area within
one-quarter mile of the exterior boundary of the parcel on
which a transit station is located to the total area within
one-half mile of a transit station's main entrance.
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/18/10 avoid a chaptering-out
problem by inserting double-jointing provisions.
ANALYSIS : The Transit Village Development Act allows
cities and counties to plan for more intense development
around transit stations: rail or light-rail stations,
ferry terminals, bus hubs, or bus transfer stations.
Transit village plans identify areas where officials want
CONTINUED
AB 987
Page
2
to encourage transit-oriented development and grant density
bonuses (AB 3152 [Bates], Chapter 780, Statutes of 1994).
The maximum size of a transit village development district
is the total area within one-quarter mile from the exterior
boundary of the parcel on which the transit station is
located.
This bill expands the maximum size of a transit village
development district from the total area within one-quarter
mile of the exterior boundary of the parcel on which a
transit station is located to the total area within
one-half mile of a transit station's main entrance.
This bill revises the legislative declarations within the
Transit Village Planning Act and adds two more findings
regarding environmental conditions and sustainable
development standards. This bill also clarifies that the
Act's reference to a "county" also means a city and county.
Comments
The public sector's investment in commuter rail,
light-rail, ferries, and bus lines is part of a wider
strategy to improve air quality, save energy, and improve
mobility. When communities encourage transit agencies to
build expensive systems, but then fail to promote higher
density development around transit stations, the loss is
environmental and social, as well as physical and fiscal.
Those losses are regional, not just local. One reason that
communities do not encourage denser, more compact
development around transit stations is the cost of public
works needed to support new residents and businesses.
Although this bill does not create a new funding source for
those public works, it encourages local officials and their
planners to take a wider view of transit village
development. By expanding and redefining the area for
transit village planning, this bill widens the policy
horizon.
Prior Legislation
AB 338 (Ma), 2009-10 Session, would have waived the
voter-approval requirements for setting up infrastructure
AB 987
Page
3
financing districts (IFDs) and issuing IFD bonds. Governor
Schwarzenegger vetoed the 2009 Ma bill because "elections
are the sole basis of public input and fiscal discipline in
the creation of an IFD, and it is necessary to require
voter approval." Besides expanding the planning area, AB
1221 (Ma), 2007-08 Session, would have linked IFDs to
transit village development. Governor Schwarzenegger
vetoed the 2008 Ma bill because he said that it was not a
statewide priority. Unlike the two recent attempts, this
year's bill does not amend the IFD law.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/18/10)
California Transit Association
City of Torrance
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/18/10)
Department of Housing and Community Development
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Ammiano, Arambula, Beall, Block, Blumenfield,
Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles
Calderon, Chesbro, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, Eng, Evans,
Feuer, Fong, Fuentes, Furutani, Galgiani, Hayashi,
Hernandez, Hill, Huffman, Jones, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal,
Ma, Mendoza, Monning, Nava, John A. Perez, Portantino,
Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson,
Torres, Torrico, Yamada
NOES: Adams, Anderson, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill,
Blakeslee, Conway, Cook, DeVore, Emmerson, Fletcher,
Fuller, Gaines, Garrick, Gilmore, Hagman, Harkey, Huber,
Jeffries, Knight, Logue, Miller, Nestande, Niello,
Nielsen, Silva, Smyth, Audra Strickland, Tran, Villines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Carter, De Leon, Hall, V. Manuel Perez,
Torlakson, Bass
AB 987
Page
4
AGB:mw 8/19/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****