BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 1380
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 16, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
SB 1380 (Rubio) - As Amended: August 7, 2012
Policy Committee: Natural
ResourcesVote:6-2
Transportation 13-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
As proposed to be amended, this bill creates, until January 1,
2018, an exemption to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) for bicycle plans developed for urbanized areas. The
bill also requires the lead agency permitting the bicycle plan
project under CEQA, prior to determining that a project is
exempt, to do both of the following:
1)Hold noticed public hearings in areas affected by the bicycle
transportation plan to hear and respond to public comments as
specified.
2)Include measures in the bicycle transportation plan to
mitigate potential bicycle and pedestrian safety impacts.
Amendments proposed by the author make technical changes that
avoid conflict with several other unrelated bills.
FISCAL EFFECT
Minor, absorbable costs to the Office of Planning and Research
(OPR) to post exempted bicycle plans on its website.
COMMENTS
1) Rationale. The author intends this bill to reduce the
likelihood that public money will be spent defending from
legal challenge under CEQA a bicycle plan for an urbanized
area. The author notes the experience of the City of San
Francisco, which adopted a bicycle plan in 2005. In doing
SB 1380
Page 2
so, the city determined the plan was exempt from CEQA
because, in the city's view, there was no possibility the
bicycle plan, which largely involved restriping existing
roadways, would significantly affect the environment.
Petitioners challenged the city's plan, successfully, under
CEQA, and the city conducted an environmental impact report
(EIR) to address purported environmental impacts. As a
result, according to the author, San Francisco's bicycle
plan was delayed and the city spent public funds
unnecessarily, though the plan eventually was implemented.
2) Background. CEQA obligates public officials to consider
the environmental effects of their decisions. The lead
agency that proposes to approve a project must conduct an
initial study to determine if the project may have
significant, adverse environmental effects. If not, the
lead agency issues a negative declaration and, after a
30-day review period, proceeds with its review and
decision. If the lead agency finds minor effects that can
be mitigated, it issues a mitigated negative declaration
and then proceeds. If the lead agency finds the effects of
the project may be significant, it prepares an
environmental impact report (EIR), a document that shows
public officials how to avoid or mitigate the project's
environmental effects.
Preparing the EIR begins when the lead agency sends notice
of preparation to other public agencies, soliciting advice
on the EIR's scope. If the project is of statewide,
regional, or area-wide significance, the lead agency holds
a scoping meeting with the other agencies. The lead agency
circulates its draft EIR and invites public comments during
a 45-day review period.
After this public review, the lead agency issues a final
EIR that responds to the comments that it received. After
certifying the final EIR, the lead agency files notice to
allow the project to proceed.
3) Support. This bill is supported by the Silicon Valley
Leadership Group (sponsor), the City of San Jose and other
local entities and cycling organizations who contend CEQA
challenges on local bicycle transportation plans can be
expensive and that this bill would reduce the potential for
litigation delays, such as those experienced by San
SB 1380
Page 3
Francisco.
4) Opposition. This bill is opposed by the Sierra Club,
who argues the exemption provided by this bill undermines
the likelihood the environmental impacts of bicycle plans
will be identified, appropriately reviewed and mitigated,
if necessary.
Analysis Prepared by : Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081