REFERENCES
- Barbour, E. (2015). Regional sustainability planning by metropolitan planning organizations (Doctoral dissertation). University of California, Berkeley.
- Barbour, E., & Deakin, E. (2012). Smart growth planning for climate protection. Journal of the American Planning Association, 78(1), 70–86. doi:10.1080/01944363.2011.645272
- Barbour, E., & Teitz, M. (2005 April 6). CEQA reform: Issues and options. Background report for the CEQA Improvement Advisory Group. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
- Been, V. (2005). Impact fees and housing affordability. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, 8(1), 139–185.
- Burge, G. S., Nelson, A. C., & Matthews, J. (2007). Effects of proportionate-share impact fees. Housing Policy Debate, 18(4), 679–710. doi:10.1080/10511482.2007.9521618
- Busch, B. C., Lew, E., & Distefano, J. (2015). Moving California forward: How smart growth can help California reach its 2030 climate target while creating economic and environmental co-benefits. Energy Innovation Policy & Technology LLC and Calthorpe Analytics. Retrieved from https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Moving-Forward-Summary-for-Policymakers.pdf
- California Air Resources Board. (2018). SB 375 regional greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. Retrieved from https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/finaltargets2018.pdf
- California Association of Realtors. (2018). Third quarter housing affordability. Retrieved from https://www.car.org/aboutus/mediacenter/newsreleases/2018releases/3rdqtrhousingaffordability
- California Code of Regulations. Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq. (CEQA Guidelines). Retrieved from https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Browse/Home/California/CaliforniaCodeofRegulations?guid=I95DAAA70D48811DEBC02831C6D6C108E&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)
- California Department of Housing and Community Development. (2018). California’s housing future: Challenges and opportunities—Final statewide housing assessment 2025. Retrieved from http://www.hcd.ca.gov/policy-research/plans-reports/docs/SHA_Final_Combined.pdf
- California Department of Justice. (2012). Quantifying the rate of litigation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): A case study. Retrieved from http://voiceofsandiego.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/AGCEQA.pdf
- California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). (2015). VMT_Analysis_2015_11_19. Retrieved from http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/omsp/SB743.html
- California Housing Partnership Corporation. (2016, April). Confronting California’s rent and poverty crisis: A call for state reinvestment in affordable homes. San Francisco, CA: California Housing Partnership Corporation. Retrieved from http://chpc.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/State-Housing-Need-2016.pdf
- California Natural Resources Agency. (2019). 2018 amendments and additions to the state CEQA guidelines. Retrieved from http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/2018_CEQA_FINAL_TEXT_122818.pdf
- California Public Resources Code (PRC). Division 13, Section 21000 et seq. Retrieved from https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/public-resources-code/#!tid=N13BD5B5F2C35467A83716A19C28673F6
- California Senate Bill 35. (2017–2018 Chapter 366 (Cal. Stat. 2017). Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB35
- California Senate Bill 50 (Wiener). (2019–2020) Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2019). Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB50
- California Senate Bill 743. (2013–2014). Chapter 386 (Cal. Stat. 2013). Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201320140SB743
- California Senate Bill 827 (Wiener). (2017–2018) Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2018). Retrieved from https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB827
- Carlin, B. N. F., & Farabee, D. R. (2011). CEQA streamlining legislation: Some small steps forward, but no giant leap. Retrieved from https://www.pillsburylaw.com/print/content/21806/ceqa-streamlining-legislation-some-small-steps-forward-but-no.pdf
- Cervero, R., & Hansen, M. (2002). Induced travel demand and induced road investment: A simultaneous equation analysis. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 36(3), 469–490. www.jtep.com
- City of Oakland. (2017). Transportation impact review guidelines. Oakland, CA: Author.
- City of Orange v. Valenti. (1974). 37 Cal.App.3d 240 (Cal. Ct. App. 4th Dist).
- City of Pasadena Department of Transportation. (2015). Transportation impact analysis: Current practice & guidelines. Pasadena, CA: Author.
- City of San Jose. (2018). Transportation analysis policy. Retrieved from http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm129.htm
- DeRobertis, M., Eells, J., Kott, J., & Lee, R. (2014). Changing the paradigm of traffic impact studies: How typical traffic studies inhibit sustainable transportation. Institute of Transportation Engineers. ITE Journal, 84(5), 30–35.
- Duranton, G., & Turner, M. A. (2011). The fundamental law of road congestion: Evidence from US cities. American Economic Review, 101(6), 2616–2652. doi:10.1257/aer.101.6.2616
- Elkind, E., & Stone, E. (2006). Falling flat: Why the CEQA affordable housing exemptions have not been effective (Working Paper No. 2). Los Angeles: Frankel Environmental Law and Policy Center, UCLA School of Law.
- Ewing, R., & Hamidi, S. (2014). Measuring urban sprawl and validating sprawl measures. Report prepared for the National Cancer Institute, the National Institutes of Health, the Ford Foundation, and Smart Growth America. Retrieved from https://gis.cancer.gov/tools/urban-sprawl/
- Fulton, W., & Shigley, P. (2018). Guide to California planning (5th ed.). Point Arena, CA: Solano Press Books.
- Handy, S. (2005). Smart growth and the transportation-land use connection: What does the research tell us? International Regional Science Review, 28(2), 146–167. doi:10.1177/0160017604273626
- Henderson, J. (2011). Level of service: The politics of reconfiguring urban streets in San Francisco, CA. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), 1138–1144. doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.05.010
- Hernandez, J. (2018). California Environmental Quality Act lawsuits and California’s housing crisis. Hastings Environmental Law Journal, 24(1), 21–71.
- Hernandez, J., Friedman, D., & DeHerrera, S. (2015). In the name of the environment: how litigation abuse under the California Environmental Quality Act undermines California’s environmental, social equity and economic priorities—And proposed reforms to protect the environment from CEQA litigation abuse. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/hollandknight/docs/ceqa_litigation_abuseissuu?e=16627326/14197714
- Howard, R., Olhausen, M., & Walker, A. (2018, December 18). Assessing SB 35—Success or failure? Gavel2Gavel Construction & Real Estate Law. Retrieved from https://www.gravel2gavel.com/assessing-sb-35/
- Hymel, K. (2019). If you built it, they will drive: Measuring induced demand for vehicle travel in urban areas. Transport Policy, 76, 57–66. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.12.006
- Institute of Transportation Engineers. (2010). Transportation impact analyses for site development (5th ed.). Washington, DC.: Transportation Research Board.
- Jaffe, E. (2014, July). Transit projects are about to get much, much easier in California. CityLab. Retrieved from https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2014/07/transit-projects-are-about-to-get-much-much-easier-in-california/374049/
- Jones, S. M. (2002). CEQA’s influence on development in Alameda County, California (Master’s thesis). San Jose State University, CA.
- Kendall, M. (2018, September 4). Berkeley rejects controversial project that sought fast-track under new state law. Mercury News. Retrieved from https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/09/04/berkeley-rejects-controversial-project-that-sought-fast-track-under-new-state-law/
- Laidley, T. (2016). Measuring sprawl: A new index, recent trends, and future research. Urban Affairs Review, 52(1), 66–97. doi:10.1177/1078087414568812
- Landis, J. D. (2004). Ten steps to housing affordability in the East Bay and California (Reprint 2004–02). Berkeley: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley.
- Landis, J. D., Pendall, R., Olshansky, R., & Huang, W. (1995). Fixing CEQA: Options and opportunities for reforming the California Environmental Quality Act. Final Report to the California Policy Seminar. On file with authors.
- Larson, P., & Perrus, J. (2010). Reforming environmental review. Bench & Bar of Minnesota, 67(1).
- Lee, A. E., & Handy, S. L. (2018). Leaving level-of-service behind: The implications of a shift to VMT impact metrics. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 29(2018), 14–25. doi:10.1016/j.rtbm.2018.02.003
- Los Angeles City Department of Transportation. (2016). Transportation impact study guidelines. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
- Los Angeles City Departments of City Planning and Transportation. (2019). Proposed California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) transportation section update. Retrieved from https://ladot.lacity.org/sites/g/files/wph266/f/CEQA%20Thresholds%20with%20TAG%20Chapter%202_Guidelines_Chapter2_Clean%2020190219_v2.pdf
- Los Angeles County. (2015). Assessor parcels—2015 tax roll (database: eGIS_Cadastral). Retrieved from https://egis3.lacounty.gov/dataportal/2016/04/06/assessor-parcels-2015-tax-roll/
- Ma, Z., Becker, D. R., & Kilgore, M. (2009). Characterising the landscape of state environmental review policies and procedures in the United States: A national assessment. Journal of Environmental Planning & Management, 52(8), 1035–1051. doi:10.1080/09640560903327591
- Mackey, K. V. (2014). Reforming the “Blob”: Why California’s latest approach to amending CEQA is a bad idea. Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, 39(2), 357–389.
- McKinsey Global Institute. (2016, October). A tool kit to close California’s housing gap: 3.5 million homes by 2025. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/∼/media/McKinsey/Featured%20Insights/Urbanization/Closing%20Californias%20housing%20gap/Closing-Californias-housing-gap-Full-report.ashx
- Milam, R. (2012). Transportation impact analysis gets a failing grade when it comes to climate change and smart growth. Retrieved from https://www.sanjoseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3320
- Muller, P. (2004). Transportation and urban form: Stages in the spatial evolution of the American metropolis. In S. Hanson (Ed.), The geography of urban transportation (3rd ed., pp. 59–85). New York, NY: Guildford Press.
- New York Department of Environmental Conservation. (2012). Full environmental assessment form (FEAF) workbook. Retrieved from https://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/permits_ej_operations_pdf/feafprint.pdf
- Office of Planning and Research. (2013). Preliminary evaluation of alternative methods of transportation analysis. Retrieved from https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/PreliminaryEvaluationTransportationMetrics.pdf
- Office of Planning and Research. (2016). Revised proposal on updates to the CEQA guidelines on evaluating transportation impacts in CEQA. Retrieved from https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/Revised_VMT_CEQA_Guidelines_Proposal_January_20_2016.pdf
- Office of Planning and Research. (2018, December). Technical advisory on evaluating transportation impacts in CEQA. Retrieved from http://opr.ca.gov/docs/20181228-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf
- O’Neill, M., Gualco-Nelson, G., & Biber, E. (2019). Developing policy from the ground up: Examining entitlement in the Bay Area to inform California’s housing policy debates. Hastings Environmental Law Journal, 25(1), 1–84.
- Ojuri, O. (2015). Assessing the impact of California Senate Bill 743 on transportation planning, traffic impact analysis, and level-of-service. Irvine: University of California, Irvine.
- Olshansky, R. (1996a). The California Environmental Quality Act and local planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 62(3), 313–330. doi:10.1080/01944369608975697
- Olshansky, R. (1996b). Evaluation of the California Environmental Quality Act. Environmental Management, 20(1), 11–23. doi:10.1007/PL00006694
- Pendall, R. (1998). Problems and prospects in local environmental assessment: Lessons from the United States. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 41(1), 5–24. doi:10.1080/09640569811777
- Rappa, J. G. (2002). Comparison of state development impact fee statutes. OLR Research Report 2002-R-0842. Retrieved from https://www.cga.ct.gov/2002/rpt/2002-R-0582.htm
- Reid, C., Galante, C., & Weinstein-Carnes, A. (2017). Addressing California’s housing shortage: Lessons from Massachusetts Chapter B. Journal of Affordable Housing, 25(2), 241–274. Retrieved from http://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/uploads/AH_25-2_15Reid.pdf
- Reynolds, L. (2015). Quicker, easier, cheaper? The efficacy of CEQA streamlining for infill development (Master’s thesis). California State University, Sacramento.
- Roess, R. P., & Prassas, E. S. (2014). The fundamental concept of level of service. In R. P. Roess & E. S. Prassas (Eds.), The highway capacity manual: A conceptual and research history (pp. 49–76). Basel, Switzerland: Springer International. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-05786-6
- Rose, E. (2011). Leveraging a new law: Reducing greenhouse gas emissions under Senate Bill 375. Retrieved from http://www.crec.berkeley.edu/LeveragingaNewLaw.pdf
- Rothman, L. D. (2011). CEQA turns forty: The more things change, the more they remain the same. Environmental Law News, 20(1). Retrieved from https://law.ucdavis.edu/centers/environmental/files/Rothman-article-Hernandez.pdf
- San Francisco Planning Department. (2016). Executive summary: Resolution modifying transportation impact analysis (report prepared for March 3, 2016 San Francisco Planning Commission hearing). San Francisco, CA: Author.
- Schneider, B. (2018, April 18 YIMBYs defeated as California’s transit density bill stalls. CityLab. Retrieved from https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/04/californias-transit-density-bill-stalls/558341/
- Smith-Heimer, J., & Hitchcock, J. (2019). CEQA and housing production: 2018 survey of California cities and counties. Retrieved from https://senv.senate.ca.gov/sites/senv.senate.ca.gov/files/ceqa_and_housing_production_report.pdf
- Smith-Heimer, J., Hitchcock, J., Roosa, P., & Guerrero, C. (2016). CEQA in the 21st century: Environmental quality, economic propserity, and sustainable development in California. Retrieved from https://rosefdn.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/CEQA-in-the-21st-Century.pdf
- Stahl, K. A. (2018). “Yes in my backyard”: Can a new pro-housing movement overcome the power of NIMBYs? Zoning and Planning Law Report, 41(3), 1–16.
- Taylor, M. (2015). California’s high housing costs: Causes and consequences. Sacramento, CA: Legislative Analyst’s Office.
- Thomas, T. (1993). CEQA turns twenty-one: In defense of CEQA. Land Use Forum, 2(2), 102–108.
- University of California Davis Policy Institute for Energy Environment and the Economy. (2015). Achieving California’s greenhouse gas goals: A focus on transportation. Retrieved from https://www.next10.org/sites/default/files/UCD%20Next%2010%20Report%20FINAL%20082015.pdf
- U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2018). State of the cities data systems building permits database: Table of housing unit building permits for Los Angeles, CA from 2001 through 2016 (compiled from the Census Bureau’s Building Permits Survey). Retrieved from https://socds.huduser.gov/permits/output_annual.odb
- Volker, J., Lee, A., & Kaylor, J. (2019). LOS to VMT and SB 743 implementation—Survey results from local planning departments in California. On file with authors.
- Washington Department of Ecology. (n.d). SEPA environmental checklist. Retrieved from https://ecology.wa.gov/Regulations-Permits/SEPA/Environmental-review/SEPA-guidance/SEPA-checklist-guidance