AB 2245 Update: On to the Senate Floor

AB 2245 (which would exempt bike lanes from CEQA processes) is rolling along; expect a vote in the CA Senate next

Earlier this month, California Assembly Bill 2245 took one more step toward simplifying the process of adding bike lanes to existing streets. The bill, officially entitled “Environmental quality: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): exemption: bikeways,” passed through the California State Environmental Quality Committee in unanimous fashion (7 ayes, 0 noes).  The next step for this piece of legislation is to be introduced on the Senate floor once the State Legislature reconvenes after its summer recess. According to the office of the aforementioned committee, the bill will likely be put to a vote in late August. 

Currently, CEQA requires cities and counties to file an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) if the construction and operation of proposed projects are deemed to significantly effect the surrounding environment, both natural and human-made. The bill in consideration would permit local agencies to forgo such rigorous review for Class II bikeway (bike lane) projects. Under the current guidelines, some bike lane projects in the City of L.A. need an EIR if their traffic impacts go over specified thresholds. If AB 2245 is passed, cities and counties would instead have to prepare traffic and safety impact assessments; and then hold public hearings to discuss such impacts. This exemption would allow decision makers to still consider the traffic impacts of bike lanes, but without wasting the time and resources that an EIR process requires, allowing more effort to be placed on planning and public outreach. Click here to view the bill text and the bill analysis.

September-10,-2007-098.gif

The State Senate will vote on AB 2245 between August 20-31. Photo by California Progress Report.

Show your support of this piece of legislation to make sure we can expedite the installation of bike lanes throughout California! Contact your state senator to encourage her/him to approve the passage of this bill. Don’t know your state senator? Click here.

0 replies
  1. Karl
    Karl says:

    EIR’s are always met by resistance but how can it be other then shortsighted it’s in that vigorous debate that we might be able to finally fund only the projects that makes sense instead of as rule never them or at best them last.

    Encouraging bike ownership can be shown, when done recklessly, to drastically reduce the mpg’s of the owners ‘other vehicle- so they buy a suv instead of a prius to haul there downhill racer around from the silence that deafens them to sharing or picking up used for barely five figures a bike that doens’t need a truck to transport because it’s got clean batteries and is charged at night by neighbors lucky to be able to borrow if only for the better workout that charging the battereis while they ride recratioinally intead of just moving it around.

    The bike lanes need tohave minimum speeds not just maxiuum and the minimumm needs tobe a median speed of all fitness levels meaning if yoru not in the top half of fitness you need to check your pride and apply for a grant withthe project funds concerved getting you that ’15 minute’ of uphill capacity assistance, speed maintaining not just alacrity infrastructure onboard ifi not inductively provided sothat even people wihtout batteries can keep up and not congest.

    The law will stifle innovation. It will serve to protect cars from there obsolescence regardless of there detaisl beyond there bulk and size and even mass not included.

    The mininum speed shoudl be up to the car speed if that’s required to minimise congestion and the variance should be within the measurement capacity of the speed controller- probably under a mile per hour. The minimal accceleration onf some commuting routes might very well be beyodn only ‘human’ powered technology now available meaning at lealst a spring to help battery and motorlesss models not get run over should be mandated.

    Reply
  2. genea barnes
    genea barnes says:

    I wanted to reach out to the bicycle community and let them know about My Ghost Bike Project and the kickstarter that I am launching to fund a month long road trip to finish shooting the photos for my Ghost Bike Project. Hopefully, you forward and repost this link and maybe even become a backer (every dollar helps). I greatly appreciate you taking the time to look at this link and pass it along. For those of you that don’t know what a Ghost Bike is, it is a Bicycle that is painted all white and locked up near an intersection where a bicyclist was killed.

    Check out the project here: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1004330446/the-ghost-bike-project

    Thank you!!

    Genea

    Reply
  3. Karl
    Karl says:

    I just read the analysis and although I oppose this law I do not condone the credence of reasons given. ‘Congestion’ used to have great air quality impact. However ‘microhibrids’ will soon dominate our roads and they do not pollute at all during congested circumstances so the more congestion the less polution. It used to be an exponential thing- now it’s barely linear and for planning the more roadblocks the less polution. to be suffered is not just an obvious thing but finally true- no longer will claims that if you can’t go at least 45 mph you must not be very green be scientific but thankfully only dogma, dogma though that can survive when only planners offer feeble resistance to it’s carcinogenic thrive.

    I not associate myself with the isolated opposition and don’t even recall exactly there valour in stepping up honestly but not stragecly unlike those silent so cynicly.

    The bill it says may not be necessary for the reasons it’s supporters claim. I concur. An EIR can document and get funded to publish the positive benefit of reducing the number of cars per hour so that the number of people per hour can increased. When due process is amply offered more options can be considered- ventures no employee would dare propose can come from the crowd and be embraced by t he people and it’s for this reason that industry wants such bills- they want predictibility and status quo- they are terrified of revolution in the form of finally uninhibited revulsioni towhat they have been gettingus to do- crush maim and kill our loved ones so thaththey can too easally line thereh pockets while expressing compassion but really plotting how many more of us can perish tothere even greater profit.

    The people are our ally. It is after all there choice however speciously ‘fickle’ those ready to charge them might regard there ‘whim’ to be.

    Los Angeles can morph out of it’s car shell and fly in a season- a citizen initiative with a mere majority is unstoppable and this nation can give us over NINE DIMES ON THE DOLLAR for our present rolling stock as we pick up new vehicles engineered for our climate and our brilliance here that are recognisably NOT carrish. As a first to evolve wewill besmug foreveras the cities to follow ultimately find a ‘mazdaciding’ market- one that bills instead of pays to relieve owners of there enslaving tons of spooky madness an absurd propiganda campaign punctuates olympic time trials with- and shows us even metal chains of antique designfailing in seconds as if belts are still only made of cowhide, as if fabric only in sweat shops wove, as if gun powder was never invented or explosions be the only way too get work done.

    We can know far better. This bill is classic in it’s contempt for those it purports to serve. This is Hollywood-the place that showed even blonds have brains, before color could be recorded. We must do so much better then to fight for the right to paint stripes in the night. Let’s finish this- let’s slash those obese tires for good. For in good we can do less evil. The question ofo the airi quality impact must be asked for it to be answered and we need notfear the answer.

    We need toknw teh mpg equivalentfor electric triks and bikes- weknow what tehvolts is- but notfor even performance ‘mopeds’. WE need to have subway EIR’s that say- for the cost per passenger private nonpolluting nor congesting vehicles canbe had far better and only if bikes get there’s d one first will tehy able todo that.

    It is time to be ambitious for the first time. Individuals can now in half a day share there idea and get seven figures of funding. Law no longer needs corporate lawyers few of us can afford to drafted. Mr. Smith can from a tent on land boughtfor less then a trailer in Las Vegas change the world forever in weeks- it’s nolonger necessary to goto anotehr state or ‘nonstate actor’ without a university butu instead lobbyists. The tower is now youtube and it’s powerful enough to grown strawberries where asphault once only baked so ugly in the sun. Our first graders want to vow(a smart majority of them at least)- “no cigars, no cars ;[;only Bars! lol]- I say let them.

    Reply
  4. Karl
    Karl says:

    http://www.cudc.kent.edu/pop_up_city/rockwell/img/Pop_Up_Rockwell_Report.pdf

    demonstrates how using ‘chalk’ instead of paint can show impact instead of speculating about it. Donors will donate even paint- it’s forced permanency you seek instead of consent of the governed- I’ve not read this report yet but am downloading the .mov version and that’s taking about an hour but i’ll own it in better then 1080p (*streamed)’res’, in the original res of a third of gig.

    Download Pop Up Rockwell
    http://vimeo.com/43151948/download?t=1343858493&v=100814042&s=3032a0c7e8d7fda5420e92c7b8a84a09
    Original .MOV file (1920×1080 / 313MB)

    Let’s make Spring street and Main transit only all the way with room for pedestrians not just cars- room to let the soot settle so it’s not just BYOA[ir] dining.etc. (or dieing if only soot for for those for whom it’s not inhalation optional…actaully a surprising percentage of car traveling even lack there own air supplies, and I mean that- it’s so surprising! Free enterprise woudl not have that- competition would allow a market for multiyear financing of not just air bags but air tanks being no longer optional for those with bills to pay and the need to live long enough to pay them- can’t we at least try it for not an afternoon, been there after ithad been done too much and man ytimes- might be back, but just two roads, just howveerf many mesasly miles- for like a month- during the summer even, or if we are no better then Ohio a week- or just monday, so we can enjoy the air before it takes days to clear if it most be only one day, but all day, all day at least, even if just once and forever I’ll just forsake you all and never look back, I promise- just a taste, that’s all we need, trust me!

    (again I’ve not read what went down in cleveland, should it matter so much?)

    Reply

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] AB 2245 provides for a CEQA exemption for Class II bikeway (bike lane) projects. According to the LADOT bike blog, under the former guidelines some bike lane projects in the City of L.A.  would have required an EIR if their traffic impacts were over specified thresholds. […]

  2. […] AB 2245 provides for a CEQA exemption for Class II bikeway (bike lane) projects. According to the LADOT bike blog, under the former guidelines some bike lane projects in the City of L.A.  would have required an EIR if their traffic impacts were over specified thresholds. […]

  3. […] why it took so long to get any bike infrastructure built or bike lanes striped, wonder no more and be prepared to celebrate soon. CEQA, a well intentioned environmental law that puts an incredible burden on cities to justify why […]

  4. […] this morning, we received word that Governor Brown has signed AB 2245 into law.  The new law provides for a CEQA exemption for Class II bikeway (bike lane) projects. […]

  5. […] this morning, we received word that Governor Brown has signed AB 2245 into law.  The new law provides for a CEQA exemption for Class II bikeway (bike lane) projects. […]

  6. […] this morning, we received word that Governor Brown has signed AB 2245 into law.  The new law provides for a CEQA exemption for Class II bikeway (bike lane) projects. […]

  7. […] followed by an explanation of LACBC’s bicycle outreach strategy and requirements for Assembly Bill 2245, which would simplify the environmental review process for future bicycle lanes. In addition, LADOT […]

  8. […] legislators are working on a bill now that would grant CEQA exemptions to bike lane projects. The LADOT Bike Blog explains that AB 2245, otherwise known by the incredibly sexy title “Environmental quality: California […]

  9. […] Bill to Remove Bikeways from EIR Process Advances in Sacramento (LADOT Bike Blog) […]

  10. […] bill is advancing in the state legislature to exempt bike lanes from the requirements of the state’s air quality (CEQA) rules; of course, something that makes […]

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *