Boston & Smarth Growth

[statler]

Funny how this subject has never come up on this forum.

Banker & Tradesman - July 28, 2009

State?s Lack Of Smart Growth Goals Potentially ?A Real Problem?

By Ian B. Murphy

Banker & Tradesman Staff Writer

07/28/09

The lack of any discernible statewide smart growth priorities in Massachusetts could waste money, according to at least one local planner, and municipalities may be better served promoting their own smart growth goals.

Andre Leroux, executive director of the Massachusetts Smart Growth Alliance, said the commonwealth didn't have any smart growth priorities right now, and money allocated without any clear vision on how to spend it could be wasted.

Leroux was a panelist at a smart growth forum hosted by MassHousing and the Citizens Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA).

"We haven't arrived at a place where we've articulated a state vision," Leroux said. "Perhaps there is a more conservative and more focused way we could spend our money."

Instead of trying to bend the massive bureaucracy of Massachusetts state government, Leroux suggested that local initiatives could bring a greater immediate impact.

"Local efforts tend to be more concrete, more focused on incomes than state policy has been to date," he said.

At the forum, Cambridge's Lincoln Institute of Land Policy presented findings from its study of smart growth in eight states - four states with statewide initiatives, and four without.

The conclusion was smart growth states performed well on the initiatives that received intense focus and planning, but often fell behind in other areas. Overall, states without statewide smart growth focuses fell behind in most areas, except in the case of Colorado, which was lauded for having specific and successful local initiatives.

Terry Szold, former city planner for Lawrence and a professor of land use planning at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said even without reform of the state's 40a zoning laws, there were tweaks that could be made to local zoning that would promote smart growth.

"Even if no changes are made to 40a, there is no excuse for localities and municipalities to do nothing," she said. "There is a lot of home rule control over zoning."

Two examples Szold suggested included reducing the number of required parking spots per square foot in new developments, and making accessory apartments by right, instead of requiring a special permit.

"Small, discrete text amendments and map amendments can make a difference," she said.

Clark Ziegler, executive director of the Massachusetts Housing Partnership, said the Lincoln Institute's study was important because it quantified successes and failures in other states, creating a model to measure any future Massachusetts smart growth.

"What gets measured gets done, and in Massachusetts that has been a real problem for us in terms of smart growth and zoning initiatives," he said.

Ziegler cautioned that without a budget fix, statewide goals and programs would be irrelevant.

"Without a viable economic and fiscal model, none of this really matters," he said.

Sidebar:

Breaking It Down

The states with clearly articulated priorities were:

* Maryland
* New Jersey
* Oregon
* Florida


The states without clearly articulated priorities were:

* Texas
* Indiana
* Colorado
* Virginia


The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy's report measured the promotion of the following goals in so-called "smart growth states":

* compact development
* protection of natural resources
* transportation connectivity
* affordable housing creation
* positive fiscal impacts

 

[Bubbybu]

And Boston was just ranked the #2 city for singles by Forbes....

http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/24/best-cities-singles-lifestyle-singles-online-dating_slide_40.html

12. San Diego

11. Austin

10. Philly

9. Milwaukee

8. Los Angeles

7. San Francisco

6. Atlanta

5. Washington DC

4. Seattle

3. Chicago

2. Boston

1. New York


NEW YORK (Reuters Life!) - New York has been rated the best U.S. city for singles, bumping Atlanta out of the top spot.

The Big Apple also edged past Boston, Chicago, Seattle and Washington, D.C., which rounded out the top five cities in the Forbes.com survey.

Atlanta fell to No. 6, followed by San Francisco, Los Angeles, Milwaukee and Philadelphia.

It was the first time New York had won the title in the annual poll that assessed 40 of the largest U.S. urban areas for coolness, cost of living alone, culture, job growth, online dating, nightlife and ratio of singles to the entire population in the area.

But it was online dating that pushed it to the No. 1 position because it has more people with active online dating accounts than any other city in the country.

"Wherever you live, even if it's Jacksonville, Fla., which falls dead last on our list, there's a community of singles making the best of that particular place," said Lauren Sherman, of Forbes.com.

"Whether that means embracing the great outdoors around Denver or buying the next round of tequila shots in nightlife-oriented Virginia Beach, there are plenty of other like-minded people on the prowl. And, right now, the easiest place to find them is online," she added in a statement.

Financial stresses felt by New Yorkers in the last year caused a shift in priorities, which may also have contributed to New York's success, according to Forbes.com.

Whereas New Yorkers may once have been preoccupied with earning high salaries, they appear now to be putting a greater emphasis on finding love.

Compared with past years, Cleveland, Ohio, is the biggest gainer, moving up 24 spots from 38 to 14, while Providence, Rhode Island moved up 18 spots to No. 15

Phoenix, Arizona, performed less well, falling out of the Top 10 to No. 30.