This first Climate Change Update is regarding SB 375 and last week’s Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Spring General Assembly and Business Meeting with “Call to Action” concerning “SB 375: Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions through Land Use and Transportation Planning.”
Meeting Agenda, Participants: The meeting took place on Thursday, April 23 and was presided over by Rose Jacob Gibson, ABAG President and San Mateo County Supervisor. The morning session included an audience of some 80 people, most of whom were elected city and county officials and local planning, transit and environmental department managers. The agenda included: David Chiu, San Francisco Supervisor and Board President, who gave the host city welcome; Nancy McFadden, Senior Vice President of Public Affairs for PG&E Corporation, who gave the morning keynote; a three-person panel on “Setting the Stage” that included moderator Scott Haggerty, Alameda County Supervisor; and, a five-person panel on “Implementing SB 375” that included moderator Dave Cortese, Santa Clara County Supervisor.
SB 375 Purpose, Approach: SB 375 was signed into law by the Governor on September 30, 2008, and mandates that regions pursue an integrated land-use and transportation planning approach for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from cars and light trucks. SB 375 implements provisions of California’s AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which calls for reducing the State’s GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.
SB 375 requires California’s Air Resources Board (ARB) to assign a greenhouse gas emissions reduction target to each of the state’s metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) for the years 2020 and 2035. ARB must propose draft reduction targets by June 10, 2010 and adopt final targets by September 30, 2010.
SB 375 Key Elements: 1. Established a Regional Targets Advisory Committee (RTAC), through which stakeholders can recommend factors and methodologies for ARB to consider in setting the targets. 2. Requires each MPO to meet its emission reduction targets by developing a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) for its region, i.e., a regional growth plan designed to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Of key importance, the SCS will be part of each region’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), thus linking its new growth strategy to transportation planning law. In addition, regional transportation funding decisions must be consistent with the SCS. 3. Requires MPOs to align their Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process and requirements with their RTP, thus for the first time linking regional transportation and housing planning. 4. If a region does not meet its reduction target, the MPO is required to create an Alternative Planning Strategy (APS) containing more aggressive reduction measures. 5. Provides “CEQA Exemptions and Streamlining” for two types of development projects that conform to the SCS and help reduce VMT even if they conflict with a local community’s plans: residential or mixed-use projects, and “transit priority projects.”
The Nine-county Bay Area: The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) are the region’s two formally designated MPOs. More important, these two agencies, together with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), formed a regional planning consortium, the Joint Policy Committee (JPC), and it is the JPC that will serve as the primary policy-making body that will draft the Bay Area’s Sustainable Communities Strategy. Already in 2007, the JPC approved a “Bay Area Regional Agency Climate Protection Program” with a stated goal to “employ all feasible, cost-effective strategies to meet and surpass the State’s targets of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.”
The MTC on April 22 produced its updated Regional Transportation Plan, “Transportation 2035 Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area,” which outlines how more than $200 billion in federal, state, and local transportation funds will be spent over the next 25 years. “Transportation 2035” contains major elements that should contribute to VMT reductions and will be included in the Bay Area’s SCS, such as “FOCUS,” an incentive-based regional planning initiative, and the launch of a “Transportation Climate Action Campaign.”
SB 375 Analysis: For the most part, regional and municipal leaders across the U.S. barely have begun to use local planning as a strategic tool to seriously address global climate change, which is why SB 375 is groundbreaking. But the success, or lack thereof, of SB 375 likely will vary on a region-by-region basis according to the wherewithal of each region’s planners and local elected officials. To even have a chance of crafting an effective SCS, regional planning, transportation and local government leaders will have to cooperate and compromise to an unprecedented degree even though our political processes are not set up that way.
Moreover, SB 375 does not tie state or federal funding to land use decisions, does not confer land-use authority onto the MPOs, and does not force local governments to comply with their region’s SCS. There are other caveats and exemptions in the bill that potentially undermine its intent.
The CEQA exemptions are controversial to some, but SB 375 contains language watering down the impact, such as the fact that they can’t be granted until the SCS is adopted. At the same time, state legislators are considering clean-up legislation that would increase CEQA streamlining.
Requiring regional leaders to incorporate their RHNA requirements into their RTP introduces a healthy dose of realism regarding the imperative to cut GHG emissions even as regions plan for population growth.
Bay Area Perspective: One speaker after another at the April 23 meeting extolled the need to “work together.” More than an obvious platitude that one expects to hear from elected officials, this chorus highlighted the enormous challenge of achieving meaningful regional cooperation on nitty-gritty matters such as which constituencies will get which incentives, dollar allocations, and development and transit projects. And of course, the end result needs to be less driving, less traffic, greater use of more easily accessible public transit, and pedestrian-friendly downtowns that are good for business and residents.
Thanks primarily to the leadership of ABAG, MTC, and the JPC, as well as numerous stakeholders involved with shaping MTC’s “Transportation 2035” plan, the Bay Area’s effort to produce a robust strategy that will reduce VMT is well underway. Several of the speakers cited examples of mostly nascent or pilot projects that have potential to significantly reduce GHGs if scaled up, such as Berkeley FIRST, which provides cheap loans with favorable terms for residents installing solar energy for their homes, and a proposed Regional HOT network consisting of 800 miles of HOT (high-occupancy and/or toll) lanes that promise to reduce traffic congestion while raising revenue for public transit.
In addition, FOCUS has the potential to be a highly effective tool, as it “directs financial assistance and other resources to Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs)” to foster infill development near transit and provide long-term protection to “regionally significant open spaces.” These PDAs and PCAs already have been identified, and at least one prominent panelist at the meeting felt that PDAs are the “backbone” of the Bay Area’s pending Sustainable Communities Strategy.
Next up: The Bay Area Air Quality Management District hosts a “Climate Action Leadership Summit” on Monday, May 4 at the Fox Oakland Theatre with the keynote provided by acclaimed author, columnist, and foreign affairs expert Thomas Friedman.
