BILL ANALYSIS SB 375 Page 1 Date of Hearing: August 22, 2007 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Mark Leno, Chair SB 375 (Steinberg) - As Amended: July 17, 2007 Policy Committee: Local GovernmentVote:5-1 Transportation 8-5 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: Yes SUMMARY This bill makes numerous changes with respect to regional transportation and land use planning, with the overall goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the transportation sector in California. Key provisions require the larger regional transportation planning agencies to develop more sophisticated transportation planning models, and to use them for the purpose of creating "preferred growth scenarios" in their regional plans that limit greenhouse gas emissions. The bill also provides incentives for local governments to incorporate these preferred growth scenarios into the transportation elements of their general land use plans. FISCAL EFFECT 1)The California Transportation Commission would incur one-time costs of up to $200,000 in 2007-08 for the adoption of modeling guidelines. Potential minor ongoing costs associated with updated guidelines and reviews of regional models. 2)The California Air Resources Board would require one-half of an additional PY in 2007-08 and 2008-09 (annual cost of $72,500), and a full additional PY thereafter (annual cost of $145,000) for the workload associated with this bill. 3)The requirement that regional transportation planning agencies develop enhanced travel demand models and preferred growth scenarios may result in a reimbursable state mandate, potentially resulting in state costs exceeding several millions of dollars. SB 375 Page 2 SUMMARY (CONTINUED) The main provisions of this bill are as follows: 1)Requires the California Transportation Commission (CTC), in consultation with the Air Resources Board (ARB), to adopt guidelines for travel demand models that are used by the larger regional transportation planning agencies. Requires these guidelines to account for the relationship between land use density and household automobile usage, the impact of enhanced transit service levels on vehicle usage, and the amount of new travel and land development resulting from highway or passenger rail expansion. 2)Requires the California Air Resources Board (ARB), in consultation with the affected transportation agencies, to set regional greenhouse gas emission reduction targets related to the transportation sector, and establish measures to reduce these emissions. 3)Requires regional transportation agencies to include in their regional transportation plans a "preferred growth scenario," consistent with state planning priorities, which includes various land-use elements (such as accommodation of housing needs and development exclusions for open space and farmlands), complies with the federal Clean Air Act, includes an inventory of the region's emission of greenhouse gases from automobiles and light trucks sector, and establishes measures to reduce these emissions to the target levels developed by the ARB. If the preferred growth scenario is unable to achieve the ARB emission targets, the transportation agencies are further required to prepare a supplement report showing how the targets could be achieved through additional transportation investments, land use incentives, or other programs and incentives. 4)Requires that the preferred growth scenario exclude from development a variety of lands, including publicly owned parks, open space, habitat protection areas, farmland, and floodplains. 5)Requires that most transportation projects funded beginning in 2009 be consistent with regional transportation plans. Excludes from this requirement projects contained in the 2006 SB 375 Page 3 and 2008 federal transportation improvement programs or funded pursuant to Proposition 1B. 6)Authorizes certain projects within an eligible local jurisdiction to be exempted from specified California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. In order to receive the exemption, the local jurisdiction must have amended its general plan so that the land use, circulation, housing, and open space elements are consistent with the region's preferred growth scenario. COMMENTS 1)Background. Existing law requires regional transportation planning agencies to develop a transportation plan to provide policy guidance to local and state officials in achieving a coordinated regional transportation system. The regional plans must contain a policy element, an action element, and a financial element. Existing law also requires the CTC to adopt the state transportation improvement program, which includes all of the projects that are to receive state transportation funding. About three-fourths of STIP funding is allocated through regional transportation planning agencies. Travel demand models are planning tools used by regional transportation agencies in developing transportation plans. The models attempt to quantify the impacts of alternative transportation policies on such variables as automobile usage, miles traveled, travel patterns, traffic congestion, and regional development. The models differ from region to region in terms of their size, sophistication, and the types of variables forecasted. This bill is intended to provide a uniform framework for regional agencies follow in improving travel demand modeling statewide. 2)Rationale . Sponsors of this bill assert that changes in land use and transportation policy must be made to achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduction goals of AB 32. The bill is intended to accomplish these objectives by (a) requiring planners to develop and use sophisticated modeling tools to estimate the impacts of growth policies on vehicle usage, and (b) implementing a planning framework, along with fiscal incentives, for achieving targeted emissions reductions. 3)Opponents assert that the bill requires unworkable new SB 375 Page 4 land-use rules that erode local control. They also claim it will (a) create undue complications with respect to housing development, (b) result in costly reimbursable state mandate for development of models and preferred growth scenarios, and (c) potentially compromise future transportation funding. Analysis Prepared by : Brad Williams / APPR. / (916) 319-2081