SB 375 + Sustainable Communities Grant
At work, I have been working on sustainable initiatives on the local, regional and federal level. Specifically, we looked at SB 375 and the Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant issued jointly through HUD, DoT, and the EPA.
Both try to achieve the same thing - a coordinated regional plan that leads to better urban planning.
SB 375, simply put, is California’s initiative to tie land use and transportation together in order to curb sprawl, promote denser infill development, all while complying to AB 32, which tells California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. The applicable regions are the different Metropolitan Planning Organizations (for Los Angeles, it is Southern California Association of Governments - SCAG). MPOs make Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS) - a regional planning document. It works entirely on incentives, so critics say there is no “teeth” in this. Land use power is explicitly stated to remain in the hands of local powers.
The Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant is a federal initiative. $100 million, grant sizes depend on the applicant’s population. Simply put, it promotes regional coordination that promotes equitable housing (HUD), better transit (DoT), and sustainability (EPA). It creates a Regional Plan for Sustainable Development -their version of a regional planning document. But the list of eligible applicants have the potential to make this grant a kind of “free for all.” Cities can apply, along with MPOs, along with organizations. And there is apparently a complete lack of coordination in grant applications within SCAG and its cities. SANDAG (San Diego) MPO and the Bay Area all have coordinated systems for cities to apply for grants in cooperation with the MPOs.
The main difference between the two is, I think, the concept of sustainability that is addressed. For SB 375, it focuses heavily on the environmental aspect. The Regional Planning Grant focuses heavily on all three e’s of sustainability - environment, economy and equity. This is a broad generalization, but what I get from comparing the two.
Anyways, it’s great to see policies both on a state and federal level that tries to address the fact that pollution, traffic, sprawl, etc. are boundaryless. Of course, it is a long long-term goal - but a good start! I don’t know why I wrote this entry, but it really helped me to simplify the two policies and clarify them for myself.
And remember to vote no on the proposition this November that tries to defeat SB 375. It’s deceivingly named something to do with saving jobs. Yeah, no.
