Conservatives are becoming more visible within the smart growth movement; they differ in some ways both from liberal smart growth activists and from conventional conservatives.
There is finally a new blog, Smart Growth for Conservatives, focusing on issues of interest to those of us who generally support smart growth and new urbanism, and yet are less politically liberal than most people who do so.
How are conservative smart growthers (or CSGs) similar to their more liberal allies? Like environmentally minded critics of sprawl, CSGs oppose government subsidies for sprawl and sprawl-generating government regulations. In particular, quite a few of the new blog's posts focus on wasteful sprawl-generating road spending.
Having said that, CSGs do tend to differ from other smart growth supporters in a couple of ways. First, they tend to be fiscal conservatives, and thus skeptical of public amenities that are nice to have but perhaps not absolute necessities. As a result, they are less consistently supportive of public spending on public transit and pedestrian/bicycle facilities than liberals might be. Second, some issues that are generally part of today's liberal agenda are deemphasized by CSGs. In particular, CSGs are less likely to discuss climate change or social diversity than liberal new urbanists. I also suspect that CSGs are less likely to support smart growth regulations such as Oregon's growth boundaries; but since most Americans don't live in Oregon, CSGs aren't as obsessed with these regulations as are conventional pro-sprawl conservatives.
Of course, CSGs differ among themselves. Some CSGs are (as Mitt Romney might say) "severe" fiscal conservatives, and thus tend to be skeptical of all large-scale government expenditures. Personally, I am more of a Nixon Republican - which is to say, although I am less pro-regulation and egalitarian than many liberals, I am willing to support government spending not just as an "investment" (whatever that means) but as a public amenity akin to parks and schools.
Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.
California plans to bury El Niño’s downpour
If the state plays its cards right, it may be able to store a billion acre-feet of El Niño’s water in aquifers.
Desperate measures: Advocates weigh draining Lake Powell to fill Colorado River
Draining the reservoir could reduce evaporation losses by a couple hundred thousand acre-feet.
Chicago voters approve permanent festival grounds, penalty for vacant property owners
Currently, major summer and fall festivals take over public parks for weeks at a time, drawing criticism from nearby residents
NYC votes to cut outdoor dining red tape, speed up permitting
New York City also voted to allow the Department of Transportation to begin work on urgent projects before notifying elected officials.
California appears to reject Prop. 45
The proposition would have expanded the projects that qualify for a streamlined environmental review, effectively paring down the California Environmental Quality Act.
FREE Course: Walkable City 1: Why Walkability?
After describing his path towards focusing on walkability as the essence of good planning, Jeff Speck marches through his five principal reasons for making more walkable places.
Reinventing Malls: Planning Alchemy—Turning Gray Fields Into Gold
The course focuses on the opportunities and imperatives that shape reinvention of mall sites.
City of Rosemead
Rutgers University, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy
One Hundred Miles
Hunter College, City University of New York (CUNY)
The Architects Foundation
University of Cincinnati Online
City of Cambridge
Montrose County
The Pocatello Development Authority