AB 417 would increase bicycle transit plans
by Brian Leubitz
Every so often I delve into the joy of filed legislation, and now seems like a good time. There hasn’t been too much progress made at the subject matter committees. So, with that, I jumped into the decrepit website that the state pretends is a suitable California legislation tracking system with a random number. My choice this time: 417.
I had my choice between an SB 417 and an AB 417. Considering that SB 417 was a technical change to the Dept of Consumer Affairs, off I went to check out AB 417, a bill by Asm. Jim Frazier (D-Oakley). AB 417 is one of many CEQA reform bills that are up for consideration this year. While CEQA reform brings a lot of political baggage, this one wades into another big question of green planning: bicycle transit planning. Here’s the Leg Analyst’s take:
This bill, until January 1, 2018, would exempt from CEQA a bicycle transportation plan for an urbanized area, as specified, and would also require a local agency that determines that the bicycle transportation plan is exempt under this provision and approves or determines to carry out that project, to file notice of the determination with OPR and the county clerk. This bill would require OPR to post specified information on its Internet Web site, as prescribed.
Here in San Francisco, we’ve had a fight over our bicycle transit plan for years upon years with CEQA used as an extremely blunt instrument to slow implementation. While I’m very careful about CEQA reform, this is one area that clearly needs it.
That being said, this may be swept into the broader CEQA reform conversation, for better or worse.
Brian, you are aware (of course) that the whole CEQA/bike thing is nothing mroe than a tactic by the CEQA reform lobby to expose the rank hypocrisy of the “leave CEQA alone” lobby. It was Senator Rubio’s brainchild…he being an avid cyclist himself.
What could be more environmentally friendly than cycling to work and what could better expose the flaws of a supposed environmental protection law than its use to stop bycicle master plans as in san Francisco.
You think CEQA needs to be reformed to allow people to bike to work or transit. thats GREAT! what if we allow CEQA reform to allow construction of housing next to job centers and transit? wouldn’t that be better? of course it would…the problem being that if you propose that common sense solution you run into the chief proponents od CEQA, (not the enviros) but the construction trades who use the law to force developers into giving them project labor agreements.
Its an easy and mostly meaningless feelgood bill to give CEQA relief to bike plans. Have some balls and support CEQA relief for affordable housing next to transit! lets see how committed you are to the environment! are you willing to cross your buddies in organized labor to protect the planet?
The so called blue/green coalition is an unholy alliance between environmentalists who don’t want anytyhing built, and construction trades who dont give a crap what gets built so long as its built by labor contractors.
The end result is that the environment suffers. It has become impossible to build infill sustainable projects because CEQA gives labor a veto on every project. The net result is that development is pushed from urban centers to the fringes and the suburbs where labor has less clout, and we get auto dependent sprawling sub divisions.