Sito di Fabrizio Bottini in italiano
|  |
> Mall_int
> Cities
> Sprawling places
|
Is League of Cities a friend of sprawl, or a foe?
|
|
Publishing date: 04.07.2008 |
|
League has chance to help pass a key bill that would encourage sustainable growth with a smarter guidance of future development. The Sacramento Bee, July 2, 2008
|
If California's population were to remain static, its fight to slash greenhouse gases and vehicle pollution would be much easier.
But that's not going to happen. The state is expected to add between 7 million and 11 million people by 2025.
Where those people live, and how much they drive each day for work and errands, could determine if the state meets its environmental goals or sees them go up in smoke.
For the second year in a row, state Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, is trying to pass legislation that would marry the state's climate crusade with smarter guidance of future growth. Senate Bill 375 has gone through months of negotiations and changes. It is now nearly ready for the governor's signature.
SB 375, which has already passed the Senate, recognizes the forces driving spread-out development. Cheap farmland and access to state highway funds prompt developers to build on the distant periphery of cities. People who move there end up commuting long distances, adding to vehicle emissions and freeway congestion, which the state must then try to correct.
At the same time, developers trying to build housing within cities often face lawsuits under the California Environmental Quality Act. Such litigation, and the threat of it, tips the scales further in favor of leapfrog subdivisions and strip malls.
To alter this pattern, Steinberg's bill would require each metropolitan region to adopt a "sustainable community strategy" to limit emissions of greenhouse gases. The Air Resources Board would then provide each region with targets for reducing emissions. Regions that didn't adopt Sacramento-style "Blueprint" plans to reduce vehicle trips and emissions would have a harder time obtaining funds from the California Transportation Commission.
As a further incentive, the bill would provide developers with exemptions from the California Environmental Quality Act if they built projects consistent with these regional blueprints.
This deal includes a win for nearly everyone. Progressive developers would get relief from CEQA. Local governments could spend more of their limited transportation funds on existing neighborhoods. Environmentalists would get a hedge on vehicle emissions, with less development pressure on open space and farmland.
Partly because of the way he has crafted SB 375, Steinberg has managed to assemble a delicate coalition that includes many builders, the League of Conservation Voters and leaders of the California State Association of Counties. He's on the verge of passing one of this year's most important pieces of legislation, except for a major holdout – the League of California Cities.
Last year, the League complained that SB 375 was moving too quickly. So Steinberg held the bill in the Assembly. Despite months of talks and concessions by Steinberg, municipal leaders haven't budged much from their 2007 position, which suggests they are just stalling for time.
As some mayors should be aware, cities would benefit greatly from a state law that encourages developers to build in-town housing instead of the same old sprawl. Steinberg has tried to play nice with the League. But the time for niceties is over. SB 375 needs to pass out of the Assembly and go to the governor's desk.
|
|
|
Il sito di Edoardo Salzano
|
