They say the states are laboratories of democracy, and I believe it. I'm still studying this proposal, but it seems that the State of California is considering legislation that would give infrastructure and transportation improvement precedence to existing "high-density" areas where people already live and work (rather than fueling sprawl by providing easy access to outlying areas).
This is an effort to reduce greenhouse emissions by creating less of a need for people to drive to the places they need to go. I look forward to seeing how this turns out, but on the face of it, it looks like enlightened policy using market forces (yes, the government is a player in the market) to combat sprawl and greenhouse gas emissions.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
As someone who has railed on urban sprawl a few times in this blog, I wish to cast my vote in favor of this plan. Hopefully, Californians will demonstrate quantifiable successes in reducing fuel-consumption, cleaning up inner-cities, reducing crime, salvaging what remains of their natural open areas (which in California is admittedly still a lot) and anything else that might be an intended or unintended good consequence. I have a love, no doubt instilled in my youth living in rural communities, of being able to step out my door and see nature (and at certain times of the year, kill it) but I must admit, I find places like Shirlington, Crystal City and Pentagon Row (all in Arlington VA) semi-appealing for the all-in-one-place kind of arrangement they provide. If I liked being around crowds of people and looking at artificial horizons more than I do, I would probably seek such a place to live (and work and shop and dine, etc). They are generally clean, well-mannered, low crime and, for an urbanite, fun places to be. Heck, they are even fun, experienced in moderation, for a curmudgeonly ruralite (is that a word?) like me.
And increasingly, me.
Oh boy, I can't wait for the day when I'm told where I can and can't live.
Little over-reaction, Doc? No one is telling anyone where they can or can't live. The State is simply saying they're not going to spend public money to enable folks to live 80 miles from where they work by building lovely superhighways to connect them.
I'm ok with this.
Post a Comment