1. Successful SB 375 Implementation: What Could it mean for California? Amanda Eaken Natural Resources Defense Council California Transportation Commission RTP Guidelines Workshop July 1, 2009

2. The Problem: VMT Growth Threatens to Overwhelm the GHG Benefits of Pavley and LCFS

3. CO2 from Household Transportation San Francisco Bay Area Source: © Center For Neighborhood Technology, Housing Transportation and Affordability Index. May 26, 2009 Metric Tons/HH Data NA █ 0 to 3.3 █ 3.3 to 5.1 █ 5.1 to 6.5 █ 6.5 to 8.6 █ 8.6+ █

4. Public Opinion Is Shifting 71% are very concerned about the impact of development on climate pollution. 57% agree that "business and homes should be built closer together" so stores and shops are within walking distance. 61% agree that new home construction should be limited in outlying areas and encouraged in very urban areas. 81% want to redevelop older areas rather than building new. 83% support "building communities where people can walk places and use their cars less.“ 88% support more public transportation. National Association of Realtors 2007; http://www.realtor.org/smart_growth.nsf/docfiles/transportationSurveyFall2007.pdf/$FILE/transportation SurveyFall2007.pdf

5. Public Opinion Is Shifting Ballot Measures November, 2008 Los Angeles Measure R –Raised the sales tax by.5 cents to collect $40 Billion over 30 years; $25 Billion for transit. –Passed by 67.93% Sonoma Marin Measure Q – Rail to Larkspur –Raises the sales tax by.25 cents to fund a rail line, $890 Million over 20 years. –Passed with 69. 5% of the vote

6. Public Opinion Is Shifting Ballot Measures November, 2008 Santa Clara Measure B – BART to San Jose –Raises the sales tax.0125 cents; $1.5 Billion over 30 years. –Passed with 66.78%. California Proposition 1A –Authorizes $10 Billion in bonds for High Speed Rail. –52.6% voted to approve.

7. Demographics are Changing Households consisting of couples with at least one child. –1960’s: 48% –2000: 33% –2030: 27% “Preparing for the Next Building Boom” Arthur C. Nelson, Ph.D. FAICP. February 2007. http://www.mi.vt.edu/uploads/Nelson%20Smart%20Growth%20Conf%202-9- 07.ppt#290,1,Preparing for the Next Building Boom.

8. The Housing Market is Changing Source: Arthur C. Nelson, Presidential Professor, Director of Metropolitan Research Center, University of Utah

9. The California Market is Changing Compact Development Market Share 1998 – 2004: 40% 2008: 50% (attached only) 1.Compact Development is attached units plus small lot detached. 2.Ewing and Nelson, CO2 Reductions Attributable to Smart Growth in California, September 2008.

10. Source: Calthorpe Associates

11. Housing Mix 2020

12. Housing Mix 2050

13. Land Consumed (Sq. Miles) to Accommodate 2050 Growth 4,600 square miles saved. More land than Delaware and Rhode Island combined

14. Cumulative VMT Reduction from Trend to 2050 Equivalent to taking ALL cars off California’s roads for 8 years

15. Cumulative Fuel Consumed Reduction from Trend to 2050 Equivalent to 10 ½ months of oil imports to the US.

16. Cumulative Fuel Cost Reduction from Trend per Household to 2050 $45,000 saved per Household

17. Total Building Energy Reduction from Trend to 2050 (BTUs) Equivalent to Energy Used by 18 million Central Valley homes in a Year

18. Total Water Saved Acre-Feet Reduction from Trend in 2050 More water than Lake Shasta and Hetch Hetchy combined.

19. Annual Water Usage per Household Reduction from Trend in 2050 Equivalent to 865 showers per year for each Household

20. Annual GHG Emissions Reduction from Trend in 2050 in Million Metric Tons CO 2 e (MMT) Equivalent to planting 5.2 million acres of trees. Bigger than the 9-county Bay Area + Sacramento.

21. Annual GHG Emissions Reduction from Trend in 2020 in Million Metric Tons CO 2 e (MMT) Equivalent to planting 3.9 million acres of trees. Bigger than Los Angeles + Ventura counties. 8.4 MMT 12.9 MMT

22. Benefits of SB 375 Implementation GHG emissions reduced Reduced infrastructure Costs Savings to household budgets More housing choice Shorter commute times Less air pollution Increased petroleum conservation More farmland and open space conserved More water conserved More building energy conservation Greater walkable access to commercial and civic amenities Improved public health

23. Federal Legislation ACES (Waxman, Markey) Surface Transportation Re-Authorization (Oberstar) CLEAN TEA (Blumenauer, Carper, Tauscher) Smart Planning for Smart Growth Act of 2009 (Matsui) Regional GHG reduction targets Improved data collection and modeling

24. New SB 375 Guide Available www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/sb375 Amanda Eaken aeaken@nrdc.org Natural Resources Defense Council www.nrdc.orgwww.nrdc.org, (415) 875-6100

26. Snapshot of SB 375

27. 1.It adds new state content to the regional transportation plan – a sustainable communities strategy – linking climate policy with transportation and land use planning. 2.It aligns the program for the regional distribution of housing to be consistent with the sustainable communities strategy. 3.It adds new provisions to the California Environmental Quality Act to assist land use decisions that implement the sustainable communities strategy. 4.It adds new modeling provisions to accurately account for the transportation impacts of land use decisions SB 375 Changes California Planning and Transportation Law in Four Basic Ways:

28. The Sustainable Communities Strategy - Regional Greenhouse Gas Emissions Targets: The Air Resources Board, after an interactive process with the regions, sets greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets for each region from the car and light truck sector The Air Board must take into account other strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, such as fuel efficiency standards and low carbon fuels

29. The Sustainable Communities Strategy: Identifies areas for housing and development for all of the region’s population. Identifies and considers significant resource areas and farmland. Sets forth an integrated development pattern and transportation network that will achieve the greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, if there is a feasible way to do so. An alternative planning strategy is prepared if it is not possible to achieve the targets within the sustainable communities strategy

30. Aligning the Regional Distribution of Housing with the Sustainable Communities Strategy: Councils of government allocate housing within a region to be consistent with the sustainable communities strategy. Housing elements will be updated every eight years, instead of five. Allocations of housing units by the Department of Housing and Community Development to regions must be consistent, to the extent feasible, with the jobs-housing balance per the regional transportation plan

31. Aligning the Regional Distribution of Housing with the Sustainable Communities Strategy: Local governments must complete housing elements within 18 months after receiving their housing allocation. Local governments have three years to complete rezoning of sites to be consistent with the designations in the housing element. A court can compel local governments to complete the rezoning if the statutory deadline is not met; if the rezoning is not completed, there are new restrictions on its power to deny or condition affordable housing projects.

32. The California Environmental Quality Act is aligned with the Sustainable Communities Strategy: Residential and mixed-use residential projects that would implement Air Board regional targets do not need to do project-level EIR analysis of certain climate impacts, growth inducing impacts, and impacts on the regional transportation network. Traffic mitigation for transit priority projects can become a policy decision instead of a project-by-project determination

33. The California Environmental Quality Act is aligned with the Sustainable Communities Strategy: A new exemption for transit priority residential and mixed-use residential projects that qualify as sustainable communities projects. A new sustainable communities environmental assessment process for transit priority projects if the environmental impacts of the project can be fully mitigated. A focused environmental impact report (EIR) process for transit priority projects if there are environmental impacts; findings of overriding consideration must be considered.