"Crucifies" may be a bit harsh. Or maybe it isn't. It's hard to tell. The New York Times article detailing the Golden State's new real estate development legislation waits until the eighth paragraph to chart the changes, and even then, it's not entirely clear how it works. "The bill yokes three regulatory and permit processes. One focuses on regional planning: how land use should be split among industry, agriculture, homes, open space and commercial centers. Another governs where roads and bridges are built. A third sets out housing needs and responsibilities… Under the pending measure, the three regulatory and permit processes must be synchronized to meet new goals, set by the state’s Air Resources Board, to reduce heat-trapping gases. Seventeen regional planning groups from across the state will submit their land-use, transportation and housing plans to the board. If the board rules that a plan will fall short of its emissions targets, then an alternative blueprint for meeting the goals must be developed. Once state approval is granted, or an alternative plan submitted, billions of dollars in state and federal transportation subsidies can be awarded. The law would allow the money to be distributed even if an alternative plan fails to pass muster." In English. "The goal is to encourage housing near current development and to reduce commutes to work." Or… "clustered communities," a new stick, the same old carrots and LOTS more red tape.
Find Reviews by Make: