Bikemike |
Jun 6, 2016 12:00 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDfan
(Post 7463287)
While I agree that an overhaul of CEQA would be ideal, the reality of such reform happening anytime soon is unlikely. I don't see how this undermines the environment when it simply allows for already zoned structures to be completed without the risk of running into NIMBY opposition tactics. This bill does not permit spot up-zoning at all, which are more likely to have greater environmental affects than already permitted (expected and reviewed) developments approved by localities. If a developer wants to upzone they would still need to go through the motions of CEQA. And this bill would primarily help infill developments in LA and SF, thus helping the environment by mitigating urban sprawl and encouraging urban, mixed use and TOD developments.
This bill does not rescind CEQA, it keeps it from over extending into needless litigation.
Add in the affordable housing requirements in the bill, and taking down unnecessary burdens to needed infill development is a plus for not only the environment, but also to low and middle income households who are suffering because of privileged and exclusionary zoning policies.
|
I guess my main problem with Brown's approach is that by bypassing local-level CEQA review, it now becomes solely reliant on macro-level general plans, which while technically in-keeping with the more generalized CEQA process when such plans were enacted, fail to address the more fine-grained issues that may still hold relevance but have been overlooked during the macro-level vetting process. Everyone knows LA's general plan is outdated and backwards, for instance. Some of the developments this would enable would be disasterous.
For larger cities like LA, SD, or SF, or just cities with outdated general plans (LA again) CEQA fails to address many environmental issues with local site plans. True, in CEQA's current state local level CEQA review has many evils, but it's not without its benefits either. As with most things in this world, there is good with the bad. The balance merely needs to be shifted.
I understand that CEQA's formal role has been bastardized by NIMBY's in order to obstruct the housing supply, but Governor Brown should be using his leadership and power to further reform the source of our housing woes in CEQA, rather than circumventing it alltogether. By passing this bill, which focuses solely on projects with affordable housing near transit (another red herring- it's SECULAR, market rate housing supply that affects macroeconomic prices, not affordable, AKA subsidized, housing) Brown is still ignoring the real problem. Affordable housing is a drop in the bucket anyhow, and the cost of subsidizing "affordable" housing passes to the general market anyway = no net benefit because "affordable" prices are set according to market rates anyway. Have you seen how much it costs to rent "affordable" units?
Also, CEQA isn't hopeless. LOS was just rescinded at the state level and discussion now centers around replacing it with VMT, which may effectively end CEQA's role as an obstructive tool for NIMBYs. Even without Brown's help, this housing crisis is being addressed AT THE SOURCE by more knowledgeable, more nuanced lawmakers. I say let that play out.
|