These examples illustrate how biased planning favors longer-distance, motorized travel over shorter, active, affordable, energy efficient, less polluting, and healthier travel options, and sprawl over compact infill development. It's time for reform.
The president's Fiscal Year 2019 Budget cuts the critical Capital investment Grants program run by the Federal Transit Administration. Projects lacking a full-funding grant agreement, like the Sacramento Streetcar, may fall victim.
The two-thirds threshold proved to be no obstacle for Sacramento streetcar proponents in a special election held June 21, when at least *250 businesses owners voted to tax themselves to fund operations of the proposed streetcar.
Residents of public housing in California's state capital now have new access to economic mobility in the form of a shared fleet of electric cars—all made possible by the state's cap-and-trade system that limits and offset carbon emissions.
As usual, California's fastest growing counties were inland, far from coastal job centers. The big surprise was that the fastest growing city was an affluent Silicon Valley suburb that had been sued in 2012 by affordable housing advocates.
The cities of West Sacramento and Sacramento have high hopes for a streetcar line planned for some of the most beautiful and urban neighborhoods in the region. The Trump Administration could still change the course of the project, however.
In Sacramento, a protracted fight involving the California Environmental Quality Act downsized a proposed development. It also added fuel to the pro-Trump, anti-development fire that swept the nation on November 8.
The state capital of California is starting to see rents that would fit in around San Francisco or Los Angeles. Although explanations are scant, some are blaming the stagnant multi-family development industry.