Bill Seeking to Reduce VMT Moves Through State Senate

sprawl.jpg

Yesterday, the Times wrote an excellent editorial promoting AB 842, “Reducing Greenhouse Gases from Sprawl."  This legislation would require cities and counties to have a plan to reduce vehicle miles traveled by 10% before they could receive "Prop C" funds fro Department of Housing and Community Development which are now doled out based on a development’s proximity to transit and other criteria.  AB 842 will prioritize helping development in communities that are
also working to reduce people’s dependency on cars.  The state budgets
roughly $850 million in Prop C funds for development annually.

The legislation, authored by Dave Jones (D-Sacramento) was heard yesterday by the Senate Transportation Committee and passed by a 9-3-1 vote.  Proving that neither sprawl or car culture are strictly partisan issues, Republican Abel Maldando of San Jose joined 8 democrats in supporting the bill.

What makes this legislation so interesting is that it doesn’t aim to reduce “congestion” or “emissions” which are goals that can be fudged or distorted, especially in long range planning documents.  After all, the City of Los Angeles, Metro and SCAG all still seem to think that you can fight congestion by building more highways and adding surface street capacity.  By setting the bar at reducing vehicle miles traveled, Jones is basically requiring community goals of less car dependency and more investment in alternative transportation.

As for the argument that older cities, such as Los Angeles, will be disproportionately hurt by this legislation?  Well, the Times actually says it best.

Some critics worry that older urban areas such as Los Angeles might lose out because it would be harder here to reduce the average number of vehicle miles. Nonsense. Urban areas must continue their investment in transit-oriented development; it can only help to create more incentive for such investment. AB 842 would work for Los Angeles twice: by encouraging continued transit planning and by stemming the growth of automobile traffic into and out of the region from adjacent counties.

The bill must be heard and passed by the Senate Appropriations Committee before going to a full vote of the Senate.  The Assembly has already passed AB 842.

Photo: Jim Frazier/Flickr

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Finally, a 710 Worthy of Support: State Considers Restricting Parking in Transit Oriented Districts (Updated Below)

|
A.B. 710, the Infill Development and Sustainable Community Act of 2011 introduced by Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner (D-Berkeley) would mandate that automobile parking minimums in Transit Oriented Developments would be capped to one car per residential unit or per 1,000 square feet of retail space.  The Assembly Housing & Community Development Committee is scheduled to hear […]

New Legislation Seeks to Lower Voter Threshold for Transit Tax Approval

|
A series of amendments proposed by Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) to SB 791 would lower the threshold of voter approval for new taxes to fund transportation improvements from 67% to 50%. “SB 791 empowers local communities to meet their local transportation needs, improve regional mobility, and invest in high-priority, job-creating infrastructure improvements,” said Sen. […]

Asm. Bob Blumenfield: It’s Time to Think Big on Transit

|
(The following op/ed was written by Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield (D-SFV), Chair of the Assembly Budget Committee in support of AB 650.  Blumenfield’s legislation has already passed the Assembly and passed the Senate Appropriations Committee yesterday.  It needs to pass the full Senate and go back to the Assembly for a concurrence vote before heading to […]