Community separator near Petaluma |
“Community
separator” is a term of which many may not be aware, even in the North Bay, but
community separators will be getting serious attention in Sonoma County during
2016. The discussion will be important
to urbanism.
In my
perfect land-use world, gas would be accurately priced to account for its
environmental and geopolitical costs, not just its extraction, refining, and
delivery costs. People would pay tax
bills that correctly reflected the costs of supporting their choice of housing
location. And we would no long pretend
that parking can be free.
In that
perfect world, walkable urban development would burgeon as the affordable
choice for many folks. And, although
many families would still have a car because cars can be remarkably useful for
some tasks, much more travel would be done by foot, bicycle, and transit as the
more affordable choices.
Today, we’re
a long way from that ideal world. Gas
continues to be subsidized. Housing
location costs continue to be offloaded to other residents or to future
generations. And we rely on a host of
financial devices to balance the books.
Or at least to pretend we do.
But the
ideal world still has lots of appeal to folks, at least in theory. And so we have filled our belts with tools
intended to protect the possibility of the ideal world against the pressure of the
flawed marketplace signals that we’ve allowed.
Perhaps the most
well-known tool is urban growth boundaries, limits set to confine the horizontal
expansion of cities, forcing at least some growth to be vertical. (I still have a philosophical discomfort with
setting “forever” limits on town growth and then leaving the door open to
revisit the boundary every twenty years, but that’s a conversation for another
time.)
Over my career,
I’ve had a first-hand look at the evolution of urban growth boundaries, or UGBs. I now live in Petaluma, location of the first
municipal UGB, after spending many years in Oregon, the first state to adopt UGBs
as statewide policy. (Petaluma and
Oregon developed the concept at roughly the same time, so generally share the
credit.) I remain a fan of the concept
if not always the execution.
But UGBs
aren’t the only tools available to counteract artificially-conceived pseudo market
forces. Zoning can also fill a role. And even more pertinently, transects, the
urbanist equivalent of zoning, are specifically tailored to preserve strong
urban forms.
However, those
tools work on the inside of UGBs and would be for naught if the counties with jurisdiction
outside the UGBs allowed unfettered development.
As there are
inside the UGBs, there are tools that restrict development outside the
UGBs. Zoning can play a role, as can
limited access to water and sewer service.
In Sonoma County, community separators are also among the tools.
Community
separators function as greenbelts, preventing upzoning and
increased development intensity within their boundaries, allowing Sonoma County
communities to remain physically and culturally distinct. (For the alternative future, consider the Los
Angeles basin or the South Bay.)
The Sonoma
County community separators were approved by the voters in 1996 with a life of
twenty years. So, if the protections
they offer are to be continued, the voters must again approve the separators
during 2016.
The
Greenbelt Alliance, as an element of their support for Priority Conservation Areas, has been leading
advocates for the retention and possible expansion of the current community
separators.
The Sonoma
County Board of Supervisors is planning a December 15 workshop on community
separators. In advance of that meeting,
the Greenbelt Alliance is working to secure letters of support from the cities
of Sonoma County for the community separators.
The Petaluma City Council will consider their letter at their December 7
meeting. I intend to be there, although
I expect that the Council is already inclined to support the letter.
For many
readers, especially for those not in Sonoma County, this may be their first
introduction to community separators.
But it won’t be their last. I
strongly support both the retention of the current separators and their
expansion. And I’ll touch upon the
subject often between now and the anticipated 2016 ballot measure.
The
separators alone won’t preserve a more urbanist future, but they’re one tool of
many that support that future and every tool is important.
My next
topic will be porches. It’s easy to
think of porches as filling needs in spring, summer, and fall, but less so in
winter. However, porches can provide a
welcoming transition during the holidays between winter weather and cheery settings. They can also provide a setting for
decorations that can send goodwill out into the neighborhood. Who doesn’t feel a bit better when passing by
a festively decorated porch at the Yuletide?
In the next few days, I’ll be decorating my porch and will then write
about porches in my next post.
As always,
your questions or comments will be appreciated.
Please comment below or email me.
And thanks for reading. - Dave Alden (davealden53@comcast.net)
No comments:
Post a Comment