Cheerful news amid the gloom! The economy has tanked so badly that the city of Petaluma, California, is thinking of shutting down its planning department.
As readers of The Best-Laid Plans know, Petaluma was the first city in the country to try to control its growth by limiting the number of building permits issued each year. Curiously, though, the city’s planning department is funded out of developer fees. That’s okay as long as some development is going on, but now there is next to none.
Symptoms cialis sales canada of diabetes in men Even though there may be few instances of erection, these die down quickly before attainment of penetration or climax. The highly qualified ingredient works effectively to enhance sildenafil cheapest the erection quality. All this while there are so many men around the globe who tend to face this problem in their buy cialis in australia life. This herb widely found in India buy levitra online has seen a meteoric rise because the surgical procedures are chosen as a treatment modality only when the conservative treatment techniques fail. The growth controls pioneered by Petaluma eventually evolved into today’s smart growth. That smart growth created the housing bubble whose deflation devastated our economy. That economic downtown shut down Petaluma development and may put planners out of their jobs.
I wonder if the planners realize how ironic this is? Probably not.
ROT: Cheerful news amid the gloom! The economy has tanked so badly that the city of Petaluma, California, is thinking of shutting down its planning department.
THWM: As long there will be politicians & lobbyists, there will be “planners”.
ROT: As readers of The Best-Laid Plans know, Petaluma was the first city in the country to try to control its growth by limiting the number of building permits issued each year. Curiously, though, the city’s planning department is funded out of developer fees. That’s okay as long as some development is going on, but now there is next to none.
THWM: So they were self financing?
ROT: The growth controls pioneered by Petaluma eventually evolved into today’s smart growth. That smart growth created the housing bubble whose deflation devastated our economy. That economic downtown shut down Petaluma development and may put planners out of their jobs.
THWM: So extreme greed and people living beyond their means didn’t play any part of this mess?
Also they didn’t pioneer any thing, zoning in the US really had it’s start around the time of WWI, even a no zoning place such as Houston has back door growth controll policies like on the sizes of lots & mandated minimum parking requirements.
Though Mr.O’Toole even you push for restrictions of travel, with your anti-transit/anti-railroad agenda.
Just so you know “suburban trains” are not hostile to “suburbs”.
Highwayman, have you heard of html tags? They let you do cool things like italics and bolding.
Unfortunately there’s no tag for you, but keep your fingers crossed for the next release.
You are an idiot.
Reaction was critical across the board, from Sonoma County’s smart-growth advocates and traditional developers alike.
Steve Geney, president of Petaluma-based North Bay Construction, said the move would hamper economic recovery. “Everybody’s had cutbacks but I haven’t heard of anybody yet completely eliminating a department,†Geney said. “I don’t know what their game is.â€Â
mattb02 said: Highwayman, have you heard of html tags? They let you do cool things like italics and bolding.
Unfortunately there’s no tag for you, but keep your fingers crossed for the next release.
You are an idiot.
THWM: Damn mattb02 you’re pathetic.
“That smart growth created the housing bubble whose deflation devastated our economy.”
Oh this makes so much sense to me now. I always thought that the our economic woes had to do with a mismanaged war, bad loans, trading those ad loans, reorganizing them and trading them again, financial companies that took all of our IRA’s/401k’s and gambled them, Madoff’s lies, and so on and so on.
But now that I know smart growth is to blame I can go buy some Chrysler stock! Thanks for showing me that planners are the ones responsible for our current economic crisis. My confidence in the private sector is restored.
That smart growth created the housing bubble whose deflation devastated our economy.
Bullsh–.
Randal continues to spread disinformation and bullsh–. Is it to prop up his failing ideology?
DS
Dan asserted:
> [quoting the Antiplanner first]
> That smart growth created the housing bubble whose deflation devastated our economy.
>
> Bullsh–.
>
> Randal continues to spread disinformation and bullsh–. Is it to prop up his failing ideology?
Okay, so don’t take the Antiplanner’s word for it.
How’s about a self-identified liberal economist and winner of The Sveriges Riksbank
Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel for 2008 … a guy
by the name of Paul Krugman, who also pens a column in a little paper
known as the New York Times.
Speaking of which, by golly, here are two of his writings for you to read – please pay
particular attention to the use of the word “flatland” and the phrase “zoned zone”
(as you might learn something).
In case you were wondering, Petaluma would be in the “zoned zone”.
That Hissing Sound
The two Americas
C.P. Zilliacuss:
In case you were wondering, Petaluma would be in the “zoned zoneâ€Â.
More precisely, the “down-zoned zone,” something that occurred mostly among higher income, white suburbia many decades before anyone thought of “New Urbanism” or “Smart Growth.” As a native of Coastal California, I heartily concur with the thesis outlined by Jonathan Levine in his book, Zoned Out, as pointed out in these editorial blurbs:
“This book introduces a new and important dimension into the debate about the causes and results of urban sprawl. Levine argues persuasively that extensive single-family residential zoning is a constraint on the exercise of a free market in real estate development and that denser urban development would result from a more open market. Levine very convincingly shows the inconsistency in the ‘free market’ arguments of some of the anti-smart growth critics [emphasis added]. . . . This book could become an intellectual benchmark in the ongoing discussion of American land-use patterns.” –Martin Wachs, University of California, Berkeley
“Jonathan Levine forcefully demonstrates as groundless the belief that compact development must prove its transportation and other benefits before it is permitted as legitimate. That view implicitly accepts the status quo of low-density development as “normal” or “privileged” until proven otherwise. In reality, the existing laws that spawn sprawling development are distortions of market forces that restrict the housing and living style choices of millions of American households. Leaving powers over land-use planning solely in the hands of parochial local governments will forever enshrine exclusionary zoning and prevent affordable housing from becoming more widespread.”
–Anthony Downs, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution
You’ll note that there is nothing in what Levine says that is inconsistent with the apparent desire of the majority of wanna-be homeowners for single family houses. Its just that the politics of many would-be homeowners has limited the options desired by the not insignificant, and growing number, of would-be homeowners who want different options, as well as the 1/3 proportion of the population likely to remain renters for economic, life style and demographic reasons.
msetty wrote:
> [quoting me]
> In case you were wondering, Petaluma would be in the “zoned zoneâ€Â.
>
> More precisely, the “down-zoned zone,†something that occurred mostly among higher income, white suburbia many
> decades before anyone thought of “New Urbanism†or “Smart Growth.†As a native of Coastal California, I heartily
> concur with the thesis outlined by Jonathan Levine in his book, Zoned Out, as pointed out in these editorial blurbs:
>
> “This book introduces a new and important dimension into the debate about the causes and results of urban sprawl.
> Levine argues persuasively that extensive single-family residential zoning is a constraint on the exercise of a
> free market in real estate development and that denser urban development would result from a more open market.
> Levine very convincingly shows the inconsistency in the ‘free market’ arguments of some of the anti-smart growth
> critics [emphasis added]. . . . This book could become an intellectual benchmark in the ongoing discussion of
> American land-use patterns.†–Martin Wachs, University of California, Berkeley
>
> “Jonathan Levine forcefully demonstrates as groundless the belief that compact development must prove its
> transportation and other benefits before it is permitted as legitimate. That view implicitly accepts the status
> quo of low-density development as “normal†or “privileged†until proven otherwise. In reality, the existing laws
> that spawn sprawling development are distortions of market forces that restrict the housing and living style
> choices of millions of American households. Leaving powers over land-use planning solely in the hands of
> parochial local governments will forever enshrine exclusionary zoning and prevent affordable housing from
> becoming more widespread.â€Â
> –Anthony Downs, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution
Mr. Setty, I am a native of the zoned zone on the other side of the United States, in particular
Montgomery County, Maryland, and it’s still where I make my home.
Instead of quoting the blurbs on a book, what say you about Krugman’s writings on this subject?
But thanks for the pointer to Levine’s book.
Not so sure I agree with the phrase down-zoned zone, even though Montgomery County was arguably
doing Smart Growth as far back as the 1960’s, and our County Council has been obsessed with the land use
and transportation (or I should say land use and mass transit) connection since the sometime in the
1970’s.
Note that this obsession has not led to less highway traffic congestion, even though it has led to
the construction of many non single-family-detached dwelling units over the years.
As you may be aware, Montgomery County upzoned a large swath of its eastern area in 1981 as part of a
comprehensive master plan, the 1981 Eastern Montgomery County Master Plan, which had several goals:
(1) Increase transit ridership so streets and highways would not be congested. (didn’t work)
(2) Reduce so-called auto dependency. (didn’t work)
(2) Provide receiving areas for transferable development rights to protect the areas of the
county deemed to fall within its so-called Agricultual Preserve. (did work)
(3) Encourage construction of many condominium and townhome dwelling units. (did work)
The three points above were called a concept of transit serviceability. (didn’t work)
Nor were these impacts considered:
– Impact on public schools
– Impact on EMS and fire services
– Crime caused in part by concentrations of large numbers of poor people in communities laid-out to make certain criminal activities easy
Zilliacus:
Montgomery County, and Arlington County in Virginia, are one of the few exceptions to the downzoned zone in suburban America. Land use policies in both places obvious were heavily influenced by the construction of the Washington Metrorail.
Do you know what the transit usage rates and per capita automobile mileage is in Montgomery County compared to other less dense suburbs? I’m sure this information is around somewhere…also, how do housing prices compare to other counties in the DC area? I’m aware that the region’s housing prices are still relatively high, thanks to high demand caused by high-paid bureaucrats, beltway bandits, and others living off the Federal teat…
CP:
Neither Krugman nor Glaeser support your ideology, despite the fact that they are selectively quoted often in op-eds written by adherents of a certain ideology. These selective quoters are people who write things to try to dupe people into believing such things.
DS
In New Zealand we are suffering the same problems in the land market as Petaluma and yet we had none of those banking practices etc some of you blame for it all. Indeed our banking system is rated one of the most stable in the world. But we did have smart growth and the planners joined the fashion for fining newcomers with development contributions.
Now there is no development, the planning departments are going broke, and so are the councils.
And in Auckland city they are having to pay $500 million for extra drainage to deal with all the extra sewage etc from the subsidised apartment building in down town.
So much for using excess capacity.
Actually the outer suburbs do pay their way.
The development contributions go to Council fantasies such as swimming pools and towards roads in other parts of the district.
We tax cigarettes to stop smoking but seem to believe that taxing development (and requiring payment up front not out of revenues) will not stop development?
Dream On.
Houston vs Smart Growth Cities
Lets get some facts.
The last I heard average home prices last year and this year were about the same, $150,000.
How about the foreclosure rate? Is it the same as the Smart growth cities?
Let’s get the facts.
Lets.
Houston is actually very similar to a Smart Growth city in a number of respects. They have the same basic type of zoning. Which is what Planners are trying to get to.
The difference is that Houstonians are completely dependent upon their cars, and have among the highest VMT and carbon footprint in the nation, an indicator that the development paradigm is unsustainable. But their zoning is very similar to what Smart Growth folk want to do.
So I guess Smart Growth in Houston is not as certain ideologies are portraying it (huh.). I hope this doesn’t undermine their non-starter ideology…
DS
We got a tiny bit of good news in Portland – at least one traffic calming specialist is having his job ended. That will mean safer streets as there will be fewer speed bumps to slow down emergency vehicles.
Thanks
JK
JimKarlock said: We got a tiny bit of good news in Portland – at least one traffic calming specialist is having his job ended. That will mean safer streets as there will be fewer speed bumps to slow down emergency vehicles.
THWM: Just reducing the speed limit in a given area, can get better traffic results.
JK —> Speed bumps leads to reducing emergency vehicle response times which lead to more deaths? Are you serious?
Most of the speed bumps that I have seen in my life have been on private properpty.