Streamlining CEQA
Urban Land Institute--San
Francisco District Council
November 11, 2011
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
1
•Charles A. Long
•Charles A. Long Properties, LLC
•Oakland, CA
• Developer specializing mixed use development in California, US
• Consultant on real estate development, redevelopment, capital finance
and economic development
• Instructor for ULI Real Estate School on development process, publicprivate partnerships and sustainable development
• Former city manager of Fairfield, CA and interim manager in Mammoth
Lakes, Pinole, and Hercules, California.
• Author of “Finance for Real Estate Development” published April 2011
and contributing author to ULI Retail Handbook.
• Served on 14 ULI advisory panels, chairing panels in Salem OR,
Boise, ID and Dallas, TX
• Masters in Public Policy, UC Berkeley; platoon sergeant, US Army
Site Selection and Due Diligence
2
2
Development today is transformative
"Transformation from
a car-dominated
tangle of offices,
malls and auto dealers
into a livable city."
East 14th St., San Leandro, CA
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
3
3
Development is more complicated
physically and economically
•
•
•
•
•
•
More urban and mixed use
Public benefits more important
More complicated economics
More conversions from old uses
Less leverage and no “value add” financing
Density confusion
Appleton Mills, Lowell, MA
West End Commons, Oakland, CA
Lakeside Steel Plant, Chicago
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
4
Mixed use is hard to do
Community acceptance
Entitlement risk
Parking costs and layout
Resizing the infrastructure
Financing challenges
Conflicts among uses
Silver Spring Town Center
Getting the density right for
the community and the
economics
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
5
Entitlement process now is more challenging
Alameda NAS,
Alameda, CA
• More public
involvement
• More review steps
• Skepticism about
density.
• Development impacts
must be funded
• Pre-development risk
results in missed
opportunities.
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
6
Development today is inherently
public private
Uptown, Oakland, CA
• 665 rental units; 25
percent affordable
• New, one half acre park
• $160 million private
cost
• $50 million public
investment
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
7
Development is…
a separate self financing enterprise that goes from
small to large.
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
•8
8
80% to 90% of project value is created in
the pre-development phase
Acquisition, design, entitlement,
financing, risk management
Project Value
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
9
Community planning reduces entitlement risk
•
•
•
•
•
Livermore, CA downtown specific plan
•
•
•
Principles
Include all stakeholders
Base the plan on the market
Analyze all the impacts
Develop implementation tools
Identify public infrastructure
needs
Imbed flexibility
Develop knowledge/skill in real
estate
Use the RFQ
Walnut Creek, CA downtown plan
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
10
High quality, consistent standards are less risky
and produce high value
" Simplify the process for
• Developers prefer to
developers. By streamlining
compete on value, not
permitting and construction
cost.
processes, getting departments
to work together to promote
• Policies may cost more but
infill, and ensuring
make the community more
requirements are consistent,
valuable.
cities can smooth the way for
good development."
• First, create a great place to
--Bay Area Greenbelt Alliance
live: education, parks,
Background material\Smartinfill
executive summary.pdf
transportation and the long
term value will pay for the
costs.
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
11
Should cities be able to exempt sustainable projects
from CEQA and to implement projects that are
consistent with a specific or area-wide plan without
additional CEQA review?
Feasibility
Need
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
0%
a. Feasible throughout
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
a. Very Important
b. Feasible in some regions
b. Desirable
c. Difficult but achievable
c. Not Needed
d. Forget it-it ain't gonna
happen
d. Counterproductive
55%
87%
Strategies to implement
AB32 and SB375
12
60%
SB375: Connects transportation funding
to land use plan = reduces VMT
• 18 MPOs prepare Sustainable
Communities Strategy (SCS)
linked to Transportation Plan &
Housing Allocations.
• Projects consistent with SCS
exempt CEQA review
• Projects inconsistent with SCS
denied funding.
Millions of tonnes per year Carbon equivalent
• GHG emission reduction targets
2020 and 2035 under AB32.
•U.S. CO2 emissions = 1.51 billion tons/year (CE)
600
500
400
Through Electricity
Natural Gas
Petroleum
Coal
•34%
•27%
•21%
Trucks Buses
•19%
300
Air
200
LDVs
100
0
Residential
Commercial
Industrial
•Source: Precourt
Institute
Transportation
Conclusions of ULI Panel: June 2010
Greater
Certainty
Transit
Funding
Alignment
CEQA
Streamlining
How CEQA Actually Works
• A tool for opponents of infill
– A way to impose time, cost and complexity.
• Focus tends to be on service delivery issues
– Mitigation measures usually do not relate to environmental
issues but on infrastructure and service deficiencies such as
traffic, noise, and school service shortages.
• Piecemeal application
– Encourages incremental, project-by-project analysis and fails
to address regional impacts of individual project decisions.
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
15
CEQA Streamlining Work Group—May 2011
TIERING
EXEMPTIONS
• Projects consistent with
SB375 Sustainable
Community Strategy are
exempt.
• Projects consistent with
previous specific or
community plans require
no additional CEQA
analysis
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
16
CEQA Streamlining Work Group—May 2011
5 issues
1. Broaden criteria for projects qualifying for an exemption
either as a Transit Priority Project (TPP) or a residential
infill project with prior CEQA analysis .
2. Broaden and clarify authority to exempt a project with
prior CEQA analysis
3. Clarify authority to exempt a project already analyzed in
a Regional Transportation Plan, Sustainable Community
Strategy, or Alternative Planning Strategy
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
17
CEQA Streamlining Work Group—May 2011
5 issues
4. Enhance ability to exempt infill projects within
specially designated infill development opportunity
areas (such as priority development areas in the Bay
Area, or smart growth centers in the San Diego Area)
5. Enhance ability for projects to qualifying for tiering or
exemptions in wetlands, hazardous waste, building code
compliance, toxic exposure and seismic safety fails
through incorporation of design elements that address
these concerns.
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
18
Legislation signed in 2011—Three Bills
1. AB 900: Leadership Projects:
1.Minimum investment $100 million
2.LEED certified
3.10& trip reduction
4.Infill
5.Consistent with SCS
6.High job production
7.No new GHG
8.Accelerated appeal directly to Court of Appeal
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
19
Legislation signed in 2011—Three Bills
2. SB 292: Los Angeles football stadium
1. Litigation goes directly to Court of Appeals
2. Streamlined CEQA process with time frames
and dispute resolution
3. Focus of litigation only on disputed mitigation
measures
4. Limits on comments.
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
20
Legislation signed in 2011—Three Bills
3. SB 226: Streamlining for solar and infill
1. Limited exemption for solar energy systems
2. Allows concurrent regional CEQA and land
use scoping meetings
3. Preserves exemptions for projects with GHG
emissions.
4. Enhances tiering authority for “urban infill”
and limits further review solely to:
1. Site specific issues
2. New information
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
21
What are you doing to streamline CEQA?
Suggestions?
Urban Land Institute
CEQA Streamlining
22