Novato City Council Agenda Staff Report Date: ______________ File No. ____________

cc13_061.docx; 5/8/2013 1

STAFF REPORT MEETING DATE: May 14, 2013 TO: City Council FROM: Robert Brown, Community Development Director PRESENTER: Robert Brown SUBJECT: REPORT ON DRAFT PLAN BAY AREA AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (DEIR) REQUEST Accept Report. Direct staff to forward comments on the Draft Plan Bay Area and DEIR to ABAG and MTC. RECOMMENDATION Accept Report. Direct staff to forward comments on the Draft Plan Bay Area and DEIR to ABAG and MTC. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Consistent with Assembly Bill 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act) and Senate Bill 375 (Sustainable Communities Strategy), the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) have jointly completed the Draft Plan Bay Area (Draft Plan). The Draft Plan serves as the Bay Area’s Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) to plan for future growth with the goal to reduce the region’s greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by 2020 and 2035. The Draft Plan is complex as it combines/joins regional land use planning and transportation planning practices that have been historically employed and implemented independently by ABAG and MTC. The Draft Plan incorporates: a land use component that covers the State-mandated Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) as well as the ABAG jobs and housing growth projections for 2040; a transportation and investment component addressing transportation projects and funding; and an open space conservation component. ABAG/MTC has prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) assessing the environmental impacts of the Draft Plan and its implementation. The DEIR is a “program-level” document, meaning that it assesses environmental impacts at a very broad, mostly regional level, of future growth through the year 2040 compared to current conditions. The DEIR does not

75 Rowland Way #200 Novato, CA 94945-3232

(415) 899-8900 FAX (415) 899-8213

www.novato.org

Page 1

2

assess the impacts of specific transportation or development projects at a countywide or local level. Rather, it is the intent of this environmental document to be used or “tiered” from as part of local jurisdiction review of future environmental assessments on future development projects and/or policy documents such as General Plan updates. The benefit of this potential “tiering” is principally in areas of cumulative impacts at the regional level (e.g., air quality, water quality, freeway traffic, etc.). In summary, the Draft Plan meets the regional goals for reducing GHG emissions mandated by AB32 and SB375. However, the DEIR concludes that Draft Plan adoption and implementation will result in 40 significant environmental impacts, which cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, in order for ABAG/MTC to adopt this Draft Plan, these agencies will need to make findings of overriding consideration. Local jurisdictions are not required to adopt this Draft Plan, nor mandated to meet the Draft Plan’s 2040 jobs and housing projections through property rezoning, General Plan amendments or actual construction. The Draft Plan and process has been controversial with public focus on concerns over: loss of local land use control; recommendations for increased, concentrated growth in the inner-urban areas of the region (introduction of “Priority Development Areas”); the ABAG jobs and housing growth projections for 2040; and the linkage of the State-mandated Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA). However, there are other, important elements of the Draft Plan, which are summarized in this report. Staff has reviewed the Draft Plan and accompanying DEIR; staff comments are outlined in the Analysis section of this staff report. In brief, the critical comments are as follows:

1. The inclusion of the State-mandate Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) in the Draft Plan requires local jurisdiction compliance with the next 2014-2022 RHNA cycle. For this next cycle, the RHNA for Novato (414 residential units for the 2014-2022 cycle) is substantially less than the current RHNA allocation being addressed in the City’s Draft Housing Element (1,241 units for the 2007-2014 cycle).

2. The 2040 jobs and housing projections identified for Marin and Novato seem overly

ambitious given the few remaining vacant sites or significantly underdeveloped sites in both Novato and the entire county. Further, growth projections recently published by the State Department of Finance (DOF) report a considerably lower growth for 2040 than the Draft Plan projections.

3. The Draft Plan DEIR has some but limited “tiering” value for use by local

jurisdictions. While this document will be useful to local jurisdictions for assessing cumulative impacts on specific topic areas such as air quality, climate change/GHG emissions and transportation, most of the topic areas studied include mitigation measures that are presently and commonly required by local jurisdictions. Lastly, while this DEIR presents provisions for CEQA Streamlining for projects within PDAs (which Novato does not have) or in areas with high frequency transit service, local jurisdictions are not mandated to apply these provisions.

Page 2

3

Staff is requesting that the City Council review and discuss the staff comments and direct staff to submit written comments to ABAG/MTC by the May 16 deadline. BACKGROUND Bay Area Regional Planning and Transportation (ABAG & MTC)

The Bay Area, which encompasses nine counties, is served by a number of regional agencies, including the ABAG and MTC. ABAG and MTC manage, administer and oversee regional planning and transportation matters. Since the early 1970’s, ABAG has served as the Bay Area’s “Council of Governments” (COG). As a COG, ABAG: a) projects and monitors jobs and housing growth for the region; and b) administers the State-mandated Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA). These roles are described as follows:

1. Since 1978, ABAG has been responsible for developing and publishing jobs and housing growth projections for the region. The projections are based, in part on the growth and development projections of local general plans, input from local agencies and trends in the economy. Historically, ABAG published the jobs and housing projections every two-four years. Local jurisdictions are not bound by or required to comply with the jobs/housing projections, but they are often used by local jurisdictions as a base for forecasting build-out in local general plans.

2. The Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) is the housing need allocation that is set

and determined for each region (e.g., the SF Bay region) by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Required by State law since 1981, RHNA represents a target number for planning and accommodating new housing units for a broad range of affordability levels. For the Bay Area region, ABAG is provided this RHNA from HCD and it is the job of ABAG, in coordination with the nine Bay Area counties and respective cities/towns, to distribute this allocation to each community. Each county and local municipality must take the share of the allocation and incorporate it into their respective General Plan Housing Elements. The Housing Element must demonstrate how the local allocation can be met or achieved through zoning for housing and supportive General Plan implementation measures. While RHNA does not require municipalities to build housing to meet this allocation, the Housing Element must demonstrate, to the satisfaction of HCD, that the local municipality zoning and property inventory can accommodate the allocation. Further, approved and proposed housing development projects are counted toward meeting the RHNA. Once incorporated into the local Housing Element and adopted by the local municipality, the Housing Element must be certified by HCD. At present, RHNA is administered in seven-year-cycles.

MTC oversees and manages transportation planning and coordination for the Bay Area region. MTC is responsible for developing a regional transportation plan (RTP) which sets the long-term transportation needs (transportation improvements) for a region and the funding to implement these needs. In addition, MTC is responsible for coordinating with the State (Caltrans) on transportation projects for the region, and administering funds and grants received from the State and Federal level. MTC is responsible for allocating and distributing the Federal and State funds

Page 3

4

and grants to the congestion management agencies throughout the nine Bay Area counties. Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) serves as the congestion management agency for Marin County. Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) and Senate Bill 375 (SB 375)

Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, established state legislation requiring a statewide reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The reduction of GHG emissions is to be achieved in numerous ways. In response, in 2010, Novato adopted a Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP), which includes a list of robust implementation measures to locally reduce GHG emissions. In 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Senate Bill 375 (SB 375), which promoted a direct linkage of regional transportation plans (RTP) with the statewide goals to reduce GHG emissions. SB 375 requires that metropolitan transportation organizations (such as MTC) develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), which is to serve as a new element of the RTP. The goal of the SCS is to reach a GHG reduction target for each region. The target for the Bay Area is a seven percent (7%) GHG reduction per capita by 2020 and a 15% reduction per capita by 2035. The primary contributor to GHG impacts is emissions from fossil-fueled passenger vehicles. Therefore, the greatest effort to reach this target is to develop ways to reduce the amount of vehicle miles traveled, such as planning for more housing and jobs that can be concentrated in the urban/developed areas and around or near transit. Other aspects of AB23 mandate GHG reduction from better fuel efficiency in vehicles, including electric vehicles Bay Area Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS)

Partnership of Agencies

For the Bay Area region, the SCS process involves a partnership of four regional agencies: a) MTC; b) ABAG; c) the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD); and d) the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC). MTC and ABAG are leading the SCS coordination effort of the “Plan Bay Area,” which is required to be completed and adopted by summer 2013. The goal of the Plan Bay Area is to focus and concentrate future growth in and around a sustainable transportation system in the inner, urban areas of the Bay Area, thus reducing the need to continue to reach out to the undeveloped “green field” areas of the region to accommodate housing growth. By focusing growth in the inner-urban areas, there would be less reliance on vehicle travel, which would reduce GHG emissions. Elements of Plan Bay Area – Linkage to RHNA

The Plan Bay Area is structured to add three new elements to the Bay Area’s RTP: a) a land use component demonstrating how the region could house the entire demand for housing within the nine-county area by 2040; b) a discussion of natural resource and farmland areas to be protected; and c) a demonstration of how the development pattern and the transportation network can work together to reduce GHG emissions. To add to the complexity of this effort, the Plan Bay Area is also structured to ultimately synchronize the separate, State-mandated Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) process with the RTP process. While the Plan Bay Area is intended to plan for concentrated growth in the urban core of the Bay Area, there is no mandate that this planned growth be built. However, as discussed above, the RHNA process mandates that the housing

Page 4

5

allocation that is distributed to each local municipality be addressed in their respective Housing Elements. Right now, Housing Elements are on a seven-year review and update cycle. The Plan Bay Area inclusion of RHNA would reduce the Housing Element review and update cycle to once every 8.8 years for local jurisdictions that demonstrate compliance with the adopted Plan Bay Area. Over the past five years, ABAG and MTC have been working to develop the Plan Bay Area, which has involved numerous steps and studies that have resulted in: adjustments for the regional jobs and housing projections through 2040; adjustments to the RHNA methodology; and development of strategies and measures that are proposed to reduce the vehicle trips that are traveled in the region. Priority Development Areas (PDAs)

The key tool to achieving concentrated growth and reduction in vehicle trips has been the establishment of “Priority Development Areas” (PDA). A PDA is a geographic area that is close to, along, or within transit nodes and connections that can be earmarked for concentrated growth, particularly housing growth. ABAG established a process by which a local jurisdiction can designate a PDA. This designation applies a higher percentage of projected growth for the PDA, but it also comes with incentives. The incentives for a PDA include, among others: a) the potential for reduced requirements for and/or an exemption from CEQA review for future development in these areas; and b) greater grant and funding opportunities for planning, transportation and infrastructure. Approximately 200 PDAs are designated in the nine Bay Area counties. At present, in Marin County there are two designated PDAs in San Rafael (Downtown and Civic Center) and a planned PDA covering several, unincorporated areas along the US 101 corridor (Marin City, Strawberry, Greenbrae/Larkspur, Marinwood). Jobs-Housing Connection Scenario - 2012

Last year, as a phase of the Plan Bay Area preparation process, ABAG/MTC developed and published the “Jobs-Housing Connection Scenario,” which includes the latest jobs and housing growth projections for 2040. The methodology that was used to develop the jobs/housing projections is complicated; however, simply stated, the projections consider trends (both past and projected) that are specific to: a) regional growth patterns; b) employment (by sector/job type); c) population changes (by age, demographics and immigration); and d) housing (production and choices in housing). Downward adjustments to the projections were made in this scenario to response to many comments made by the local jurisdictions (including Novato) and the public. The adjusted projections take into consideration: a) recession recovery (re-tenanting commercial vacancies); b) an increase in home-based businesses; c) absorption of current housing vacancies; and d) an aging population. Throughout the process to develop the growth forecasts and SCS alternatives the City Council has monitored and commented on draft documents, submitting comments to ABAG/MTC on May 31, 2011, January 10 and 30, March 14 and April 20, 2012. (available at: http://www.cityofnovato.org/Index.aspx?page=1913)

Page 5

6

Marin SCS Ad-Hoc Committee

The Marin SCS Ad-Hoc Committee has been formed and staffed by TAM to monitor the Plan Bay Area process and promote collective review and comments from all communities/cities in Marin County. The SCS Ad-Hoc Committee is comprised of elected officials (Mayor Eklund representing Novato) and has met regularly to discuss information as it is distributed or made available by ABAG/MTC. Draft Plan Bay Area- March 2013

In late March 2013, ABAG/MTC published the Draft Plan Bay Area (Draft Plan). The Draft Plan has been prepared to address two critical mandates: a) reducing the region's GHG emissions by 15% by 2035 (per AB 32); and b) housing 100% of the projected growth for the region by 2040. The Draft Plan can be accessed at http://onebayarea.org/regional-initiatives/plan-bay-area.html. A summary of the Draft Plan is provided as follows: Land Use Component – RHNA & Jobs/Housing Projections

As noted above, the RHNA has been incorporated into the Draft Plan to synchronize with the timing of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The Draft Plan includes the next 2014-2022 cycle. For the Bay Area, the RHNA is 187,990 housing units for an 8.8-year projected period. ABAG, in coordination with a committee of representatives from local planners and elected officials (ABAG Housing Methodology Committee which included Mayor Eklund) developed an updated methodology for distribution of the RHNA to the nine counties and municipalities. For Marin County, the RHNA is 2,292 housing units, which is one-percent (1%) of the region’s allocation. The following table provides a breakdown of the latest draft Marin County RHNA 2014-2022 by municipality and a comparison with the 2007-2014 RHNA cycle. Novato experienced the largest proportional decrease of Marin jurisdictions.

Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) for Marin County

Municipality RHNA 2007-2014 RHNA 2014-2022(Draft)

Change

Belvedere 17 16 (1) Corte Madera 244 72 (172) Fairfax 108 61 (47) Larkspur 382 132 (250) Mill Valley 292 129 (163) Novato 1,241 414 (827) Ross 27 18 (9) San Anselmo 113 106 (7) San Rafael 1,403 1,003 (400) Sausalito 165 79 (86) Tiburon 117 78 (39) Marin Co. (uninc.) 773 184 (589) Marin Co. Total 4,882 2,292 (2,590) The Draft Plan projects a 30% increase in the Bay Area population by 2040 (increase of 2.1 million persons). For Marin, the Draft Plan projects a population increase of 13% (33,000 persons) by 2040, which is far less than the average of the growth projected for the individual Bay Area counties (e.g., by comparison, projected growth for San Mateo County is 26%). In

Page 6

7

January 2013, the State Department of Finance (DOF) published population growth projections, which forecast a 3% growth for Marin by 2040. The 10% difference in the ABAG and DOF projections is significant. The difference is attributed to ABAG’s assumptions for strong economic growth in the region by 2040 causing in-migration of new workers, and that the DOF used a different methodology based principally on anticipated births and death rates of the existing population. ABAG and DOF have agreed to work together on developing a “joint” projection for the next projections cycle which will be required for the updated Plan required to be adopted in four years. The Draft Plan projects a growth of 1.9 million jobs and 660,000 housing units for the region by 2040. These projections were distributed among the nine Bay Area counties, as presented in the table below. Overall, Marin County’s household and employment is projected to grow more slowly and far less than all other counties in the 2010-2040 period (e.g., 9% housing unit growth projection for Marin County, as compared to a 27% housing growth projection for the Bay Area).

Jobs-Housing Connection Scenario by Bay Area County

County Housing Units Employment (Jobs) 2010 2040

(addition) % Increase 2010 2040

(addition) % Increase

Alameda 582,550 147,980 29% 694,450 253,190 36% Contra Costa 400,260 80,130 23% 344,920 122,080 35% Marin 111,210 7,510 9% 110,730 18,390 17%Napa 54,760 6,050 15% 70,650 18,880 27% San Francisco 376,940 92,410 29% 568,720 190,740 34% San Mateo 271,050 55,700 22% 345,200 100,110 29% Santa Clara 631,930 211,190 36% 926,260 303,530 33% Solano 152,690 22,820 19% 132,350 47,560 36% Sonoma 204,580 31,870 19% 192,010 65,430 34% Region 2,785,990 660,000 27% 3,385,300 1,119,920 33%

As presented in the table below, the countywide jobs and housing growth projections were distributed to the Marin communities.

Draft Plan Bay Area Jobs-Housing Projections for Marin County

Municipality Housing Units Employment (Jobs) 2010 2040

(addition) % Increase 2010 2040

(addition) % Increase

Belvedere 1,050 20 2% 430 50 12% Corte Madera 4,030 230 6% 7,940 320 4% Fairfax 3,590 210 6% 1,490 330 22% Larkspur 6,380 390 6% 7,190 620 9% Mill Valley 6,530 380 6% 5,980 810 14% Novato 21,160 1,060 5% 20,890 3,490 17%Ross 880 50 6% 510 80 16% San Anselmo 5,540 250 5% 3,740 610 16% San Rafael 24,010 3,390 14% 37,620 7,340 20% Sausalito 4,540 250 6% 6,220 1,420 23% Tiburon 4,030 220 5% 2,340 340 15% Marin (uninc.) 29,500 1,050 4% 16,380 2,980 18% Marin Total 111,240 7,510 9% 110,730 18,390 17%

Page 7

8

Transportation Plan and Investment Strategy

This component of the Draft Plan covers the strategies for the planned regional transportation improvements/investments to support the projected growth, as well as the funding needed to achieve the improvements/investments. The Draft Plan recommends that investments be focused in four functions: a) maintaining the existing road and bridge system; b) maintaining existing transit; c) expanding the existing road and bridge system; and d) expanding transit (e.g., SMART rail service for the North Bay). In brief, the investment strategies include the following:

1. Funding to support focused growth and local transportation. The Draft Plan recommends continuing the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) funding program to support planning for focused growth at the local level. TAM has prepared a draft “Marin Transportation Investment Strategy” to comply with this requirement, which spans a four year period. For Novato, the Marin Investment Strategy recommends priority consideration for near-term projects for the widening of Novato Boulevard.

2. Funding to maintain and expand existing roads, bridges and transit. Planned major

transportation projects in Marin include the: a) US101 Novato “narrows” project; b) US 101 Greenbrae Interchange; and c) SMART rail service.

3. Funding earmarked for boosting freeway and transit efficiency (e.g., ramp metering,

arterial management). Funding would be supported by "road pricing," which would include: a) a regional express lane network that would promote high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, which would allow solo drivers to use a carpool lane subject to the payment of a fee; and b) congestion pricing, which would charge drivers a fee to drive in a congested area. Regarding the former, the stretch of US 101 from Windsor to Corte Madera has been identified as a road pricing zone.

4. Initiating and promoting climate program initiatives to reduce vehicle use, vehicle miles

traveled and to encourage the purchase or leasing of more electric vehicles. Draft Plan initiatives include, among others: a) adoption of a commuter benefit ordinance that would provide pre-tax benefit programs and employer-provided incentives for free shuttles and vanpools; b) car sharing; c) clean vehicle rebate program; and d) vehicle buy-back/purchase incentive program for plug-in or electric vehicles.

The transportation plan and investment strategy portion of the Draft Plan is estimated to reduce GHG emissions for the region by 6.6% by 2040. Resource Protection – Priority Conservation Areas

Another key tool in the Plan Bay Area is the proposal to designate Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs). A PCA is a geographic area that is designated for conservation/protection because of its significant resource value to the region. Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds have been made available for the Bay Area to be used to support projects that will preserve and enhance the natural, economic and social value of rural lands, including productive agricultural lands, recreation opportunities, unique ecosystems and areas critical for climate protection. The portion of this fund that is made available to Marin County is $1.25 million.

Page 8

9

In 2007, ABAG/MTC initiated the “FOCUS” process setting forth procedures and guidelines for nominating properties and projects in the Bay Area counties for PCA designation. The FOCUS process was also employed to solicit and designate PDAs. For Marin, 15 properties (mostly in West Marin) were nominated by a number of conservation and agricultural organizations and agencies. It should be noted that the local jurisdictions were not consulted on the PCA nominations. Of the 15 properties, three PCA-designated site are located in areas surrounding Novato, including the St. Vincent’s/Silveira properties. The 15 PCA-designated properties have been included in the TAM-prepared “Marin Transportation Investment Strategy,” which is discussed above (under Transportation Plan and Investment Strategy). The Marin Transportation Investment Strategy is to be used to administer the allocation of the $1.25 million funds. The selection process must include a matched financial commitment (50%) through local sources (e.g., Measure A sales tax proceeds, contributions from non-governmental organizations, local jurisdiction contributions). ABAG will be calling for new PCA nominations, which will include and consider the 15 designated properties referenced above. Ultimately, TAM will consider the designated PCAs and determine how the $1.25 million in funds will be distributed. Planning for Resilience - Climate Adaptation and Sea Level Rise

The Draft Plan includes a very brief section addressing climate adaptation and sea level rise. As BCDC is a partner in the Plan Bay Area, the Draft Plan includes the BCDC sea level rise prediction maps and a report on Bay Area efforts to study vulnerability. Surprisingly, the Draft Plan contains very little information on this topic, but the DEIR provides somewhat more detailed information (see DEIR section below). The Draft Plan endorses and commits to regional efforts to conduct vulnerability and risk assessments, a sea level rise adaptation strategy, and the development of a Transportation Asset Management Plan to provide funding to counties and local jurisdictions. Summary of Plan Performance in Complying with SB375

According to the Draft Plan, the implementation of the transportation plan and investment strategies coupled with the projected, concentrated jobs/housing growth outlined above would result in a 10% per capita reduction in GHG emissions by 2020 (exceeds 7% target) and a 16% per capita reduction by 2035 (exceeds 15% target). Relationship of Draft Plan and SB375 to Local Jurisdiction Planning

The Draft Plan, particularly the jobs and housing growth projections and RHNA elements have generated a great amount of public controversy during the Draft Plan preparation and review process. These elements have been viewed and perceived by some as a regional effort to undermine local land use control. However, the RHNA has been a State-mandate since 1981. Regardless to its linkage to Plan Bay Area, local jurisdictions have and will continue to be required to adopt a Housing Element that complies with RHNA. Regarding the 2040 jobs/housing projections, City staff has continually inquired about this critical issue and has been repeatedly told by ABAG/MTC staff that local jurisdictions are not bound by or obligated to plan for these projections, or take action to adopt the Draft Plan. In fact the Draft Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) includes the following statements, which confirms what we have been told by ABAG/MTC staff:

Page 9

10

“MTC and ABAG have no direct control over local land use planning. Nonetheless, regional efforts will be made through OBAG funding to assist local plan alignment with the Plan.” (DEIR page 2.3-33) “Local jurisdictions have local land use authority, meaning that in the case where the proposed Plan conflicts with local zoning or specific plans, the local jurisdiction would have ultimate land use authority.” (DEIR page 2.3-42) “The proposed Plan will only be implemented insofar as local jurisdictions adopt its policies and recommendations.” (DEIR page 2.3-42)

Independently, staff has reviewed the requirements of SB 375. While the regional planning and transportation agencies are required to prepare an SCS (Plan Bay Area) to demonstrate a regional reduction in GHG emissions by the targeted dates (2020 and 2035), local jurisdictions are encouraged but not required to adopt the SCS. Plan Bay Area Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) - March 2013

Program-level EIR

Pursuant to the provisions of the CEQA Guidelines, ABAG/MTC has completed and published a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) to assess the environmental impacts of the Draft Plan. The Draft Plan DEIR can be accessed at http://onebayarea.org/regional-initiatives/plan-bay-area/plan-elements/environmental-impact-report.html. The DEIR presents a region-wide assessment of the potential environmental impacts of the Draft Plan. The DEIR is prepared as a "programmatic" document (Program EIR), meaning that it reviews and assesses impacts at a broad level; it does not address or assess the impacts of individual transportation projects (e.g., TAM-sponsored or inter-county transportation projects) or development projects in local communities. However, in some topic areas, the DEIR provides a county-by-county assessment. A Program EIR is typically used as a starting point for conducting subsequent environmental review on individual projects that are broadly covered by the project (in this case, the Draft Plan). The impact assessments focus on the regional transportation plan and the regional land use plan, with particular attention on concentrated development planned for in the PDAs. The primary value of this document for local jurisdiction use (e.g., for General Plan EIRs and project assessments) is in the cumulative impact assessment covering the key topic areas of transportation, air quality, and climate change/greenhouse gases. Most of the mitigation measures and study approaches recommended in many of the topic area sections are already implemented or employed by Novato as part of our current environmental review process.

CEQA Streamlining (SB375)

While the Draft Plan DEIR provides a regional review of impacts, its purpose incorporates the "CEQA Streamlining" provisions of SB375. Essentially, SB375 mandates that a Sustainable Communities Strategy incorporate environmental review streamlining provisions for assessing "Transit Priority Projects" (TPP) and certain mixed-use residential projects. A TPP is a development project that: a) contains at least 50% residential use; b) contains between 26% and

Page 10

11

50% non-residential use and a floor area ratio (FAR) of not less than 0.75; c) provides a minimum net density of 20 dwelling units per acre; and d) is within 1/2-mile of a major transit stop (rail transit station, ferry terminal, or intersection that provides two or more bus routes providing frequent service intervals) or a high-quality transit corridor (corridor with a fixed bus service providing service intervals of no more than 15 minutes during the peak commute hours). A qualifying mixed-use residential project is one that devotes 75% of the total building square footage to residential use. The Draft Plan includes a map of geographic areas in the region that eligible for CEQA Streamlining. In Novato these are quite limited as indicated on the attached diagram included in the Draft Plan (Attachment 2). The streamlining provisions allow for both "exemptions" from environmental review or limited environmental review, depending upon the type of project and issues. In both cases, the environmental review of a qualifying project would "tier" from the Plan Bay Area EIR. It is important to note that local jurisdictions are not obligated or required to utilize or employ the CEQA Streamlining. Key DEIR Topic Areas and Conclusions

The following is a summary of the key topics analyzed in the DEIR that are specific to meeting the goals of AB 32 and SB 375 to reduce GHG emissions:

1. Transportation. The DEIR does not analyze or identify localized traffic and transportation issues that might be the focus of a local General Plan (e.g., LOS assessment of intersections or arterial segments). Rather, the regional review focuses on assessing “vehicle miles traveled” (VMT) on a regional or countywide basis. At present, most local jurisdictions do not assess VMT in their General Plans.

2. Air Quality. The DEIR provides a qualitative analysis of regional air quality impacts and consistency with the Bay Area Clean Air Plan (CAP). The air quality analysis is comprehensive but a bit confusing. The DEIR identifies concentrated areas that would be exposed to projected, cumulative air pollutants, which in Marin includes the land areas bordering the US 101 corridor and several other major transportation corridors. The DEIR recommends a two-step approach to determining the level of study or applicability of mitigation for a “sensitive receptor” use (e.g., a residential project) that is sited near a pollutant source such as US 101. First, the DEIR reports that the Air Resources Board recommends that local jurisdictions avoid siting a sensitive receptor use within 500 feet of a freeway/highway and within 200 feet of a rail line or rail station. However, if a sensitive receptor use is proposed within this distance zone, a Risk Hazard Assessment must be prepared to determine resident exposure to health and cancer risks.

3. Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases. The DEIR addresses regional flooding and sea level rise. As BCDC is a partner in the Draft Plan, local jurisdictions anticipated that this topic section might be more robust in content, analysis, strategy and direction. However, the Draft Plan and DEIR commit MTC, ABAG, BAAQMD and BCDC (as a Joint Policy Committee) to work collectively on: a vulnerability and risk assessment for regional transportation projects; the creation of a sea level rise adaptation strategy; and the development of a Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP). The TAMP would

Page 11

12

provide a template of common steps and measures that could be considered by local jurisdictions in completing local vulnerability assessments and adaptation. The DEIR includes a list of adaptive measures that could be studied and implemented by local jurisdictions, which include, but are not limited to: applying additional zoning restrictions in high risk areas (e.g., an overlay zone); establishing additional setbacks and buffers along the shoreline; raising the elevation requirement for structures; and building/raising levees, flood walls and berms.

4. Climate Change and Sea Level Rise. Regarding sea level rise, the DEIR offers more expanded discussion of the strategies and partnerships presented in the Draft Plan. Further, the DEIR includes a list of suggested adaptive measures to combat sea level rise, which will be valuable to consider when a vulnerability assessment is prepared for Novato. Nonetheless, the analysis of this topic area, albeit an evolving science, seems inadequate and the recommended mitigation measures are not sufficient at this time for local planning.

5. Water Supply. Regarding water supply, the DEIR concludes: “In general, demand

management strategies allow Bay Area water agencies to continue to meet projected demand through 2030 in average years.”. . . “All districts except Solano Water Agency will be able to provide adequate supplies to meet demand in a year of normal precipitation, although in doing so require some districts to acquire additional supplies.” Most water agencies indicate that, as a utility provider, they are required and obligated to provide service, meaning that as demand approaches the supply limit, alternatives are studied, considered and imposed including conservation measures or seeking other new sources for water.

Other DEIR topic areas that have been analyzed for potential environmental impacts include: land use and physical environment; noise; geology and seismicity; water resources, biological resources; public utilities and facilities; visual resources; and cultural resources. The DEIR concludes that the adoption and implementation of the Plan Bay Area (e.g., 30 years of Bay Area growth in areas forecast by the Plan and including anticipated transportation improvements and policies) would result in 40 significant environmental impacts, which are unavoidable and cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. In order for ABAG/MTC to adopt the Draft Plan, findings of overriding consideration will be required, meaning that the unavoidable impacts of the Draft Plan must be weighted against the benefits of the Draft Plan. The DEIR includes the review and assessment of five alternatives (including the Draft Plan, which is the project). These alternatives are described as follows:

1. Alternative 1- No Project. This alternative presents a ‘status quo’ approach, meaning the growth approach to the region would continue as it is presently planned on a community-by-community basis and with transportation funding generally directed towards individual county priorities. There would be no effort to concentrate growth in the urban, inner region through PDAs. Total growth forecasted is not substantially different than the other alternatives.

Page 12

13

2. Alternative 2- Plan Bay Area (the Project).

3. Alternative 3- Transit Priority. Like the Plan Bay Area, this alternative promotes focused

growth in the inner-urban core of the region. However, this alternative concentrates a greater amount of this growth in the three, more centrally-located urban areas of San Francisco, Oakland/East Bay and San Jose where there is high-frequency transit service. Less growth is projected for the region’s Priority Development Areas. Transportation funding is shifted from highways to transit. Bay Bridge toll is increased to $8 and state legislation is needed to impose a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) fee on all vehicles to fund additional transit.

4. Alternative 4- Enhanced Growth Network. This alternative is a hybrid of the Draft Plan

and the No Project Alternative and was proposed by business interests, with higher job growth forecast. Growth is more dispersed the Draft Plan. Bay Bridge toll is increased to $8.

5. Alternative 5- Environment, Equity and Jobs. This alternative seeks to maximize

affordable housing in high-opportunity urban and suburban areas through incentives and housing subsidies. Under this alternative, less growth is focused in the Priority Development Areas, but this growth would be shifted to areas outside the PDA, in areas eligible to qualify for transit priority projects (TPP). Further, under this alternative investment priorities would be shifted from transportation infrastructure improvements to the region’s transit services. This alternative proposes a VMT fee, contingent upon State legislative approval.

A comparison of the alternatives with the adopted Plan performance targets is included as Attachment 4. Alternatives 1 (No Project) and 4 (Enhanced Growth Network) would not be consistent with the SB 375 as the GHG emissions reduction targets would not be met. Alternative 5 has been identified as the environmentally-superior alternative, but the resulting environmental impacts of this alternative are only marginally lower than the Draft Plan and other project alternatives. The ABAG/MTC Boards could adopt another alternative, such as the Draft Plan, if they find the environmentally superior alternative is infeasible, such as due to the need to impose a regional VMT tax through state legislation, which would be extremely controversial. To adopt either the No Project or Enhanced Growth Network alternatives, since they do not meet the required GHG reduction thresholds, would require the ABAG/MTC Boards to adopt an Alternative Planning Strategy identifying how the standard could be met through alternative development patterns, infrastructure or additional transportation measures or policies, which would also require the preparation of a subsequent environmental review, most likely necessitating recirculation of the Draft EIR.

Page 13

14

Public Review Period for Draft Plan Bay Area and DEIR

The public review period for both the Draft Plan Bay Area and DEIR is 55 days. Therefore, the local jurisdictions and public must submit comments on the Draft Plan and DEIR by May 16, 2013. As we have done during the steps in the Draft Plan process, it is recommended that the City submit written comments to ABAG/MTC. The Analysis section of this report summarizes City staff review of the Draft Plan and DEIR, which could be used as a base for submitting comments to ABAG/MTC. On April 16, ABAG/MTC sponsored a public hearing on the DEIR, which was well attended. Most of the public comments submitted at this hearing focused on the Draft Plan rather than the DEIR. A public hearing on the Draft Plan was held on April 29, which was also well attended. ANALYSIS

This section focuses on City staff review and comments on the Draft Plan and DEIR. Following City Council review and direction on these comments, it is recommended that staff be directed to prepare a letter of written comments to be submitted to ABAG/MTC. The Draft Plan and DEIR were reviewed and discussed at the TAM Board meeting on April 25. The TAM Board was presented with draft letters summarizing Plan and DEIR comments compiled by TAM staff. However, the TAM Board took no action on the draft letters, instead requested that each of the Marin jurisdictions review and weigh-in on the Draft Plan and DEIR before TAM comments are finalized. Potential Comments on Draft Plan Bay Area

The Mayor and City staff have closely monitored the Plan Bay Area process, which has included City participation in the efforts of the Marin SCS Ad-Hoc Committee. Staff presents the following comments on the Draft Plan (relative to Novato):

1. The 2014-2022 RHNA for Novato is reasonable and acceptable. The 2014-2022 RHNA for Novato is 414 units, one-third of our 2007-2014 RHNA.

2. The projections for population growth presented in the Draft Plan substantially differ

from the population projections recently published by the State Department of Finance (DOF). As discussed above, the DOF forecasts a 3% population growth for Marin for 2040, which is 10% lower than the ABAG forecast of 13% growth. Although DOF used a different methodology for its forecast, the difference in the projections is significant. As noted above, DOF and ABAG have agreed to work together on developing a ‘joint’ projection for the next projections cycle (Draft Plan and projections will be updated in four years). It is prudent for the City to reinforce and support this coordination and track the adjustments in projections over the next four years.

3. The 2040 jobs projection growth for Novato is overly ambitious given past job

growth rates and the lack of vacant sites. The 2040 jobs projection (growth of 3,490

Page 14

15

jobs citywide) in this scenario has been reduced from the projections presented in the earlier Alternative Scenarios. The jobs projection has been adjusted to account for recession recovery and some increase in home-based jobs. However, this lower jobs growth projection is still inflated compared with previous job growth when Novato has substantially more commercially zoned vacant land.

4. Additional coordination between the four regional agencies (ABAG, MTC, BCDC

and BAAQMD) needs to occur since their mandates and regulations will not allow the projected infill development to occur. Inadequate consideration was given in Plan Bay Area to address sea leave rise since many PDAs and major transportation facilities are located in areas which will be inundated without substantial expenditures which are presently not identified. Air quality standards adopted recently by the BAAQMD will preclude multi-family development near a freeway (generally within 500 feet) or a transit line, which is precisely where Plan Bay Area forecasts and incentivizes residential growth.

Endorsement of a DEIR Alternative

The Alternatives section of the DEIR has been discussed at length by the Marin city/town planners and was a key topic of discussion at the TAM Board meeting on April 25. As discussed above, the DEIR assesses five alternatives, which include the Draft Plan (Alternative 2). All five alternatives were scoped and prepared using very similar jobs/housing projections. Alternative 5 has been determined to be the “environmentally superior alternative,” but would result in only marginally lower impacts than the Draft Plan and the other alternatives. The local cities/towns have been lobbied to take a position on a preferred alternative. Public comment at the April 25 TAM Board meeting called for support of Alternative 1 (No Project) and Alternative 5. TAM staff had recommended that the TAM Board formally support the Draft Plan (Alternative 2) for several reasons: a) there is very little difference in the environmental impacts resulting from the Draft Plan and Alternative 5; and b) Alternative 1 would not meet the SB375 targets for reducing GHG emissions. There is no requirement that the City take a position on a preferred alternative. As the designated representative of the Marin cities/towns, Mayor Eklund has asked that all local councilmembers assigned to monitor ABAG activities meet in late May to provide input into her ultimate vote on the Plan and EIR. Should the City Council decide to take a formal position on a preferred alternative, staff suggests support for the Draft Plan as recommended by TAM staff and based on the reasons stated above. Conclusions

Staff recommends that some of the above comments on the Draft Plan be presented in a letter of comment to ABAG/MTC. A draft letter has been prepared, which is attached (Attachment 5). If the City Council concurs with or amends/supplements staff comments, the letter will be finalized and submitted by the comment deadline date of May 16.

Page 15

16

FISCAL IMPACT Adoption of Plan Bay Area by ABAG/MTC will ultimately affect the amount of transportation funding as well as potential planning and infrastructure grants since a major intent of the Plan is to concentrate such funding in areas which member agencies have elected to encourage significant growth. Since Novato has elected to not apply for PDAs, it is anticipated that future funding opportunities will be diminished, but staff is unable to quantify the impact at this time. ALTERNATIVES The City Council has the following options to consider on this matter:

1. Accept Report with no comments to ABAG/MTC;

2. Accept Report and direct staff to make appropriate comments to ABAG/MTC; or

3. Direct staff to return with responses to questions. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Proposed Priority Conservation Areas Attachment 2: Areas eligible for CEQA Streamlining Attachment 3: Plan Bay Area - Frequently Asked Questions Attachment 4: Summary of Project Alternatives Attachment 5: Draft comment letter to ABAG/MTC

Page 16

17

ATTACHMENT 1: Priority Conservation Areas

Page 17

Page 18

18

ATTACHMENT 2: Areas Eligible for CEQA Streamlining

Page 19

Page 20

Page 21

Page 22

Page 23

Page 24

Page 25

Page 26

Page 27

Page 28

Page 29

Page 30

Page 31

Page 32

Page 33

Page 34