BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 710
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 4, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
AB 710 (Skinner) - As Amended: April 25, 2011
SUBJECT : Local planning: infill and transit-oriented
development.
SUMMARY : Establishes minimum parking standards for new
transit-oriented development. Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits a city, county, or city and county, including a
charter city, from requiring a minimum parking standard
greater than one parking space per thousand square feet of
nonresidential improvements and one parking space per unit of
residential improvements for any new development project,
including changes of use that incorporate existing building
improvements, in transit intensive areas.
2)Specifies that the minimum parking standards only apply if the
proposed project and immediately adjoining properties are not
designated for development or redevelopment at a floor area
ratio below 0.75.
3)Allows jurisdictions to require higher minimum standards for
new development if it makes written findings based upon
substantial evidence in the record, including a parking
utilization study completed within the last 24 months, that
shows existing publicly available parking that includes all
publicly owned on-street and off-street spaces and privately
owned off-street spaces accessible to the general public,
within -mile of the project site, but excluding any spaces
on exclusively residential streets, have a peak occupancy that
exceeds 85% at any point during the study period.
4)Defines "transit intensive area" as an area that is within
one-half mile of a major transit stop or high-quality transit
corridor included in a regional transportation plan.
5)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
AB 710
Page 2
periods - a term defined in existing law, but specifies that
it also includes major transit stops that are included in the
applicable regional transportation plan.
6)Defines a high-quality transit corridor as a corridor with
fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than
15 minutes during peak commute hours.
7)Specifies that a project is considered to be within -mile of
a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor if all
parcels within the project have no more than 25% of their area
farther than one-half mile from the stop or corridor and if
not more than 10% of the residential units or 100 units,
whichever is less, in the project are farther than - mile
from the stop or corridor.
8)Includes findings related to the need to reduce excessive
minimum parking standards to support infill and
transit-oriented development.
9)Includes within the definition of "sustainable communities"
for purposes of the Strategic Growth Council (SGC) those
communities that incentivize infill development.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes a city or county to grant a variance from the
parking requirements of a zoning ordinance in order that some
or all of the required parking spaces be located offsite,
including locations in other local jurisdictions, or that
in-lieu fees or facilities be provided instead of the required
parking spaces, if both the following conditions are met:
a) The variance will be an incentive to, and a benefit for,
the nonresidential development; and,
b) The variance will facilitate access to the
nonresidential development by patrons of public transit
facilities, particularly guideway facilities."
AB 710
Page 3
2)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.
3)Establishes the SGC, consisting of the Director of State
Planning and Research, the Secretary of the Resources Agency,
the Secretary for Environmental Protection, the Secretary of
Business, Transportation and Housing, the Secretary of
California Health and Human Services, and one member of the
public to be appointed by the Governor.
4)Requires the SGC, among other things, to recommend policies
and investment strategies and priorities to the Governor, the
Legislature, and to appropriate state agencies to encourage
the development of sustainable communities, such as those
communities that promote equity, strengthen the economy,
protect the environment, and promote public health and safety.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)According to the Urban Land Institute's Transportation for a
New Era: Growing more Sustainable Communities (2009) study
"the more that housing, jobs, and services spread out, the
harder it becomes to access them without an automobile. Only
with more compact development and more transportation options
- rapid transit and walkable designs - is it feasible to
achieve national goals for economic productivity and
environmental sustainability. What's more, Americans
increasingly demand more compact product types. Consumer
preference surveys and studies of housing values show that
there is an unmet demand for walkable neighborhoods. Transit
use is up and voters have repeatedly approved referendums
raising taxes or approving bond issues for expanded rapid
transit service. But
the supply of affordable compact, mixed-use, transit-oriented
development products has not kept pace. Studies show that
compact development results in fewer miles traveled, reducing
fuel consumption and emissions. In areas where housing,
AB 710
Page 4
employment, shopping, or services are close by - even in
low-density places without high-quality transit service -
people walk more. Compact development can reduce the cost of
public infrastructure and encourage healthy habits such as
incorporating walking and biking into daily routines. With
transportation options, families save. Each automobile a
household maintains costs it, annually, between $5,500 for a
small sedan driven 10,000 miles a year to nearly $12,000 for
an SUV driven 20,000 miles a year. The compact development
model can be adapted to urban, suburban, and rural contexts.
New communities can develop in more compact ways, and many
existing suburban areas are ready to be revamped into a more
concentrated, walkable, and mixed-use "village" form.
However, in many communities, development around transit and
other likely locations is stymied by zoning restrictions and
parking requirements."
2)When cities build transit-oriented development (TOD), a major
goal is to make it easier for people to walk or bicycle in the
district, while still accommodating drivers who visit, work,
or live in the area. Well-placed and appropriate quantities
of parking are vital. On-street parking is critical for
retail in a TOD to provide convenient, short-term parking for
customers, protect pedestrians from traffic, and reduce
parking spaces needed in garages or lots. Putting parking
lots or garages behind buildings or in the center of the block
makes the streetscape more attractive and is safer for
pedestrians. Ground-floor retail or residential entrances,
instead of parking lots or garages, should line the street.
Some cities will waive parking requirements with in-lieu fees
that the city uses to construct shared parking in appropriate
locations through a parking district or Business Improvement
District.
Urban planners typically set the minimum parking requirements
for every land use to satisfy the peak demand for free
parking. As a result, parking is free for 99% of automobile
trips in the United States. Minimum parking requirements
increase the supply and reduce the price- but not the cost -
of parking. They bundle the cost of parking spaces into the
cost of development, and thereby increase the prices of all
the goods and services sold at the sites that offer free
parking. Cars have many external costs, but the external cost
of parking in cities may be greater than all the other
external costs combined. Some off street parking requirements
AB 710
Page 5
are done by number of units some are done by number of
bedrooms. Some cities and counties even require certain
number of spaces for visitors.
High parking requirements encourage one mode of transportation
over others while restricting developers' profits and
neglecting the market for housing units without parking.
Buyers and renters pay a price for parking, whether they see
it or not. The amount of new housing that can be built is
sometimes restricted by the requirement of space for parking.
A number of stakeholders play a role in the development
process, including developers, lenders, the city, neighborhood
groups, housing activists, and buyers and renters. Their
respective motivations influence the process, driving toward
an outcome that finds the least resistance from the total set
of all interested parties.
Most of the parking standards that are used in urban areas and
even in fairly dense small towns were developed for outlying
areas where there's no use nearby where parking could be
shared. So a lot of the parking standards are much higher
than they need to be, and that drives the cost of housing up.
TOD supporters argue we need parking regulations that
acknowledge the possibility of using transit and shared
parking.
3)California has taken steps over the last several years to
establish programs and policies to help incentivize regional
and local planning efforts. One of the most notable is
requiring a reduction in vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse
gas emissions through coordinating regional transportation and
land use plans �SB 375 (Steinberg), Chapter 728, Statutes of
2008]. In response to these policies communities throughout
California have designed plans to: encourage denser, mixed-use
development in order to create more walkable, transit friendly
places. However, there is still much that can be done to
remove barriers and incentivize new development in these
special planning areas.
AB 710 seeks to address one barrier, highlighted by multiple
studies, which is the standard requirement for parking units
that is applied across the board. AB 710 attempts to remove
AB 710
Page 6
this barrier by promoting a policy that reduces the minimum
amount of parking a local jurisdiction may require for
projects within this very narrow set of planning areas,
thereby allowing market conditions to dictate the parking
needs associated with development in these areas.
4)Western Center on Law & Poverty and the California Rural Legal
Assistance Foundation have expressed concern that AB 710 may
have serious unintended consequences for affordable housing,
but have not taken a position on the bill and are working with
the author to address their concerns. They point out that the
bill may undercut provisions of the state's density bonus law,
which provides incentives to developers of market-rate housing
to include affordable units in their projects. The two
organizations note that they have long been proponents of
smart growth and improved access to public transit for their
low-income clients, but believe that AB 710 addresses one part
of the problem out of context with a whole host of other
concerns, including environmental justice issues.
5)Support arguments: Supporters argue that AB 710 provides a
significant incentive to housing and commercial developers to
pursue needed infill and TOD projects. According to the
supporters, increases in public transportation options and the
development of more walkable and bikeable neighborhoods reduce
the demand for parking. Relaxing minimum parking requirements
allows developers to be more creative and efficient in
supplying housing, especially in inner city areas.
Opposition arguments: Opponents argue that AB 710's
one-size-fits-all approach impedes local discretion in land
use decision-making and ignores the fact that every community
is different and has different needs. Opponents feel that
decisions about parking are best left to the discretion of
local governments, who are in a much better position to
determine how much parking their community requires.
6)This bill was heard in the Housing and Community Development
Committee on
April 27, 2011, and passed with a 7-0 vote.
AB 710
Page 7
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
CA Infill Builders Association �SPONSOR]
A.G. Spanos Companies
City of San Bernardino
Civic Enterprise Development LLC
Codding Enterprises
Creative Housing Associates
Domus Development
JMA Ventures, LLC
Natural Resources Defense Council
Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern CA
Policy in Motion
San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association
TMG Partners
Township Nine at the River District
Transform
Concerns
CA Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
Western Center on Law & Poverty
Opposition
Cities of Concord and Lakewood
Analysis Prepared by : Katie Kolitsos / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958