Regional Planning for California
I've blogged in the past about the lack of any coordinated strategy for housing growth in California. Regional Housing Needs Assessments (RHNA) and Job-Housing Balance are great theories, but the state is a paper tiger when it comes to ensuring that the state grows in a humane and cost effective manner.
San Joaquin County is the poster child for the lack of any requirement for balance of housing and jobs. Most of our population growth is due to Alameda County's refusal to provide housing to match their job creation.
Well, the state is now taking "baby steps" towards addressing this issue. As noted in Sunday's San Francisco Chronicle (click here for full story):
With little fanfare and a modest budget, work has begun that could lead to something California has never had - an explicit government vision for how and where the state should grow.
The official action is modest, a $2.5 million contract to devise a set of detailed growth scenarios for California, from classic suburban sprawl to compact development focused on older cities. The goal is to produce a single "preferred scenario" - one that conceivably could be used to prod local governments to accept or reject new construction.
The effort, called Vision California, will be overseen by the Strategic Growth Council, a Cabinet-level committee that awarded it a $1.5 million grant last month, and the California High Speed Rail Authority, which already has set aside $1 million for the work.
"We need better (modeling) tools," said Mehdi Morshed, the authority's executive director.
"Different patterns of growth can have a huge impact on how the state uses its resources."
The work will be done by Calthorpe Associates, a Berkeley firm that has developed similar plans for southern Louisiana and the Chicago region.
Vision California will begin by pulling together existing regional plans, which rarely have teeth, from such bodies as the Association of Bay Area Governments.
Calthorpe will then explore various what-ifs and compare them using comprehensive and coherent data.
For instance: If townhouses and bungalows are built instead of large single-family homes, how much agricultural land will be saved? If new housing is placed near existing jobs and shopping, rather than in distant subdivisions, what will be the effect on a household's transportation expenses?
"By showing people the results of different futures, you create a different political climate," Peter Calthorpe said. A founder of the influential Congress for the New Urbanism, Calthorpe was working for the Office of Planning and Research in 1978 when then-Gov. Jerry Brown released "Urban Strategies for California," the last serious statewide planning push.
In any case, it sounds like a fun exercise. Unfortunately, there is nothing in the works to actually make the state enforce the laws that are already on the books to ensure that regional growth is logical and affordable.
However, it is a good start--and you never know--it might get some traction.
San Joaquin County is the poster child for the lack of any requirement for balance of housing and jobs. Most of our population growth is due to Alameda County's refusal to provide housing to match their job creation.
Well, the state is now taking "baby steps" towards addressing this issue. As noted in Sunday's San Francisco Chronicle (click here for full story):
With little fanfare and a modest budget, work has begun that could lead to something California has never had - an explicit government vision for how and where the state should grow.
The official action is modest, a $2.5 million contract to devise a set of detailed growth scenarios for California, from classic suburban sprawl to compact development focused on older cities. The goal is to produce a single "preferred scenario" - one that conceivably could be used to prod local governments to accept or reject new construction.
The effort, called Vision California, will be overseen by the Strategic Growth Council, a Cabinet-level committee that awarded it a $1.5 million grant last month, and the California High Speed Rail Authority, which already has set aside $1 million for the work.
"We need better (modeling) tools," said Mehdi Morshed, the authority's executive director.
"Different patterns of growth can have a huge impact on how the state uses its resources."
The work will be done by Calthorpe Associates, a Berkeley firm that has developed similar plans for southern Louisiana and the Chicago region.
Vision California will begin by pulling together existing regional plans, which rarely have teeth, from such bodies as the Association of Bay Area Governments.
Calthorpe will then explore various what-ifs and compare them using comprehensive and coherent data.
For instance: If townhouses and bungalows are built instead of large single-family homes, how much agricultural land will be saved? If new housing is placed near existing jobs and shopping, rather than in distant subdivisions, what will be the effect on a household's transportation expenses?
"By showing people the results of different futures, you create a different political climate," Peter Calthorpe said. A founder of the influential Congress for the New Urbanism, Calthorpe was working for the Office of Planning and Research in 1978 when then-Gov. Jerry Brown released "Urban Strategies for California," the last serious statewide planning push.
In any case, it sounds like a fun exercise. Unfortunately, there is nothing in the works to actually make the state enforce the laws that are already on the books to ensure that regional growth is logical and affordable.
However, it is a good start--and you never know--it might get some traction.
Labels: Urban Planning
posted by City Manager @ 6:44 AM
1 Comments:
At November 10, 2009 10:48 AM ,
noisemaker said...
This same approach should be taken for Manteca's "downtown problem." Give the citizens (at least the voters) two to four renditions of an expertly redeveloped downtown, pick one via referendum, write the plan and start working it.
Post a Comment
<< Home