Smart growth planning for climate protection: Evaluating California's Senate Bill 375

Journal of the American Planning Association

Volumn 78, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 70-86

  Barbour, Elisa ^a   Deakin, Elizabeth A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

California; climate change; regional planning; SB 375; smart growth

Indexed keywords

AIR QUALITY; CLIMATE CHANGE; EMISSION CONTROL; ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK; LOCAL PLANNING; NEGOTIATION PROCESS; POLICY IMPLEMENTATION; POLICY MAKING; REGIONAL PLANNING;

CALIFORNIA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84857275873     PISSN: 01944363     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01944363.2011.645272     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Adams, T., Eaken, A., & Notthoff, A. (2009). Communities tackle global warming: A guide to California's SB 375. Sacramento, CA: California League of Conservation Voters and Natural Resources Defense Council.
2. Adler, J. H. (2007). Hothouse flowers: The vices and virtues of climate federalism. Temple Political & Civil Rights Law Review, 17(2), 443-464.
3. Adler, S., & Dill, J. (2004). 11 The evolution of transportation planning in the Portland metropolitan area. In Ozawa, C., ed. The Portland edge: Challenges and successes in growing communities (pps. 230-256). Washington, DC: Island Press.
4. Andreen, W., Glicksman, R., Mendelson, N., Steinzor, R., & Jones, S. (2008). Cooperative federalism and climate change (White paper No. 803). Edgewater, MD: Center for Progressive Reform.
5. Bailey, J. (2007). Lessons from the pioneers: Tackling global warming at the local level. Minneapolis, MN: Institute for Local Self-Reliance.
6. Barbour, E., Deakin, E., Newmark, G., & Lewis, M. (in press). Implementing climate policy for transportation and land use in California: Evaluating local and regional action under Senate Bill 375. Berkeley, CA: Center for Global Metropolitan Studies, University of California, for the California Energy Commission.
7. Barbour, E., & Kueppers, L. (in press). Conservation and management of ecological systems in a changing California. Climactic Change.
8. Barbour, E., & Teitz, M. (2005). CEQA reform: Issues and options. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
9. Barbour, E., & Teitz, M. (2006). Blueprint planning in California: Forging consensus on metropolitan growth and development. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
10. Barth, M., & Boriboonsomsin, K. (2008). Real-world CO2 impacts from traffic congestion (Working paper No. 846). Berkeley, CA: University of California Transportation Center.
11. Bartholomew, K., & Ewing, R. (2009). Land use-transportation scenario planning: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association, 75(1), 1-15.
12. Bassett, E., & Shandas, V. (2010). Innovation and climate action planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(4), 435-450.
13. Bay Area Air Quality Management District. (2010). California Environmental Quality Act air quality guidelines. San Francisco, CA: Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
14. Bedsworth, L., Hanak, E., & Kolko, J. (2011). Driving change: Reducing vehicle miles traveled in California. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
15. Betsill, M., & Bulkeley, H. (2007). Looking back and thinking ahead: A decade of cities and climate change research. Local Environment, 12(5), 447-456. (Pubitemid 350253502)
16. Boarnet, M. G. (2010). Planning, climate change, and transportation: Thoughts on policy analysis. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 44(8), 587-595.
17. Boarnet, M. G., Houston, D., Ferguson, G., & Spears, S. (2010). Land use and vehicle miles of travel in the climate change debate: Getting smarter than your average bear. Retrieved August 20, 2011, from http://economics. ucr.edu/spring11/Boarnet%20paper%20for%205%204%2011%20 seminar.pdf
18. Boswell, M. R., Greve, A. I., & Seale, T. L. (2010). An assessment of the link between greenhouse gas emissions inventories and climate action plans. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(4), 451-462.
19. Bulkeley, H. (2010). Cities and the governing of climate change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 35, 229-253.
20. Bulkeley, H., & Betsill, M. (2005). Rethinking sustainable cities: Multilevel governance and the "urban" politics of climate change. Environmental Politics, 14(1), 42-63.
21. Burbank, C. J. (2009). Strategies for reducing the impacts of surface transportation on global climate change: A synthesis of policy research and state and local mitigation strategies. Washington, DC: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
22. Byrne, J., Hughes, K., Rickerson, W., & Kurdgelashvili, L. (2007). American policy conflict in the greenhouse: Divergent trends in federal, regional, state, and local green energy and climate change policy. Energy Policy, 35(9), 4555-4573. (Pubitemid 46994582)
23. California Air Resources Board. (n.d.). 2000-2008 greenhouse gas inventory by scoping plan category. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved November 1, 2010, from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/ data.htm
24. California Air Resources Board. (2008a). Climate change scoping plan appendices: Volume 1. Sacramento, CA: Author.
25. California Air Resources Board. (2008b). Climate change scoping plan: A framework for change. Sacramento, CA: Author.
26. California Air Resources Board. (2010a). Proposed SB 375 greenhouse gas targets: Documentation of the resulting emissions reductions based on MPO data. Sacramento, CA: Author. Retrieved August 29, 2011, from http://www.arb.ca.gov/ cc/sb375/sb375.htm#background
27. California Air Resources Board. (2010b). Staff report: Proposed regional greenhouse gas emission reduction targets pursuant to Senate Bill 375. Sacramento, CA: Author.
28. California Air Resources Board. (2011a, February 24). Board meeting [transcript]. Sacramento, CA: Author.
29. California Air Resources Board. (2011b). Status of scoping plan recommended measures, July. Sacramento, CA: Author. California Government Code Sections 65080-65086.5, and 65580-65589.8. Available at http://www.leginfo.ca. gov
30. California Natural Resources Agency. (2010). Adopted text of the CEQA guidelines amendments (adopted December 30, 2009, effective March 18, 2010). Sacramento, CA: Author.
31. California Transportation Commission. (2010). 2010 California regional transportation plan guidelines. Sacramento, CA: Author.
32. Calthorpe, P., & Fulton, W. (2001). Regional cities. Washington, DC: Island Press.
33. Cambridge Systematics. (2009). Moving cooler: An analysis of transportation strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Washington, DC: Author.
34. City of Berkeley. (2009). Climate action plan. Berkeley, CA: Author.
35. Corfee-Morlot, J., Kamal-Chaoui, L., Donovan, M. G., Cochran, I., Robert, A., & Teasdale, P. J. (2009). Cities, climate change and multilevel governance (OECD Environmental Working Papers No. 14). Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
36. Creyts, J., Derkach, A., Nyquist, S., Ostrowksi, K., & Stephenson, J. (2007). Reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions: How much at what cost? Washington, DC: McKinsey & Company and The Conference Board.
37. Deakin, E. (2011). Climate change and sustainable transportation: The case of California. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 137(6), 372-382.
38. DeGrove, J. M. (2005). Planning policy and politics: Smart growth and the states. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
39. Dernbach, J. C., McKinstry, R. B., & Peterson, T. D. (2008). Federal climate change legislation as if the states matter. Natural Resources and Environment, 22(3), 3-8.
40. Dierwechter, Y. (2010). Metropolitan geographies of U.S. climate action: Cities, suburbs, and the local divide in global responsibilities. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 12(1), 59-82.
41. Doremus, H., & Hanemann, W. M. (2008). Of babies and bathwater: Why the Clean Air Act's cooperative federalism framework is useful for addressing global warming (Legal Studies Research Paper Series No. 144). Davis, CA: University of California, Davis.
42. Drummond, W. J. (2010). Statehouse versus greenhouse. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(4), 413-433.
43. Engel, K. (2006). State and local climate change initiatives: What is motivating state and local governments to address a global problem and what does this say about federalism and environmental law (Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 06-36). Phoenix, AZ: University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law.
44. Ewing, R., Bartholomew, K., Winkelman, S., Walters, J., & Chen, D. (2008). Growing cooler: The evidence on urban development and climate change. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
45. Fulton, W. (2008, October 1). SB 375 is now law-but what will it do? California Planning and Development Report. Retrieved November 1, 2011 from http://www.cp-dr.com/node/2140
46. Governor's Office of Planning and Research (GOPR). (2003). CEQA streamlining mechanisms used. Planners book of lists, 2003. Sacramento, CA: Author.
47. Governor's Office of Planning and Research (GOPR). (2010). Cities and counties addressing climate change. Retrieved April 3, 2011, from www.opr.ca.gov/ ceqa/pdfs/City-and-County-Plans-Addressing-Climate-Change.pdf
48. Governor's Office of Planning and Research (GOPR). (2011). Planners book of lists. Sacramento, CA: Author.
49. Greene, D., & Plotkin, S. (2011). Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. transportation. Washington, DC: Pew Center on Global Climate Change.
50. Hanak, E. (2009). Paying for infrastructure: California's choices. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
51. Hanak, E., Bedsworth, L., Swanbeck, S., & Malaczynski, J. (2008). Climate policy at the local level: A survey of California's cities and counties. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.
52. Haney, H. (2010). SB 375: Promises and pitfalls. Ecology Law QuarterlyCurrents, 37, 46-57. Retrieved August 15, 2011, from http://elq. typepad.com/currents/2010/06/currents37-06-haney-2010-0606.html
53. Heminger, S., Ikhrata, H., Gallegos, G., & McKeever, M. (2010). Preliminary report on Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)/Air Resources Board (ARB) Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) target setting process. Retrieved August 29, 2011, from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/ data/data.htm
54. Henderson, A., & Cammarota, N. (2009). A review and analysis of the legislative history of California Senate Bill 375: Moving beyond vehicle miles traveled. Retrieved September 11, 2011, from http://www. slideshare.net/kerntax/ sb-375-analysis-and-intent
55. Institute for Local Government (ILG). (2011). Evaluate Bay Area progress. Retrieved April 4, 2011, from http://www.ca-ilg.org/ bayareaprogress
56. Landis, J., Pendall, R., Olshansky, R., & Huang, W. (1995). Fixing CEQA: Options and opportunities for reforming the California Environmental Quality Act. Berkeley, CA: California Policy Seminar.
57. Luskin Center. (n.d.) Southern California climate action database. Retrieved April 3, 2011, from http://www.lewis.ucla.edu/climate/CAD/
58. Lutsey, N., & Sperling, D. (2008). America's bottom-up climate change mitigation policy. Energy Policy, 36(2), 673-685.
59. Matute, J. (2011). Measuring progress toward transportation GHG goals. Los Angeles, CA: Luskin Center, University of California, Los Angeles.
60. Office of the Governor of California. (2008). Governor Schwarzenegger signs sweeping legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through land-use. Press release, September 30. Retrieved November 17, 2011 from http://resources.ca.gov/schwarzenegger-agency-news.html
61. Olshansky, R. B. (1996). The California Environmental Quality Act and local planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 62(3), 313-330.
62. Pew Center on Global Climate Change. (n.d.) Climate change 101: State action. Retrieved April 1, 2011 from http://www.pewclimate. org/global-warming- basics/climate-change-101.
63. Rabe, B. G. (2006). Second generation climate policies in the American states: Proliferation, diffusion, and regionalization. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
64. Regional Targets Advisory Committee. (2009). Recommendations of the Regional Targets Advisory Committee (RTAC) pursuant to Senate Bill 375: A report to the Air Resources Board. Sacramento, CA: Author.
65. Rodier, C. (2009). Review of international modeling literature. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2132(1), 1-12.
66. Rose, E. (2011). Leveraging a new law: Reducing greenhouse gas emissions under Senate Bill 375. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Center for Resource-Efficient Communities.
67. Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG). (2010a). Land-Use-Deployment-SACOG060410. Retrieved September 12, 2011, from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/mpo/info.htm
68. Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG). (2010b). RTAC scenarios: Description of scenario testing for SB 375 greenhouse gas reduction target setting. Retrieved September 12, 2011, from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/mpo/ info.htm
69. San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). (2010). Responses to ARB questions. Retrieved September 12, 2011, from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/ mpo/info.htm
70. Senate Bill 375. Introduced by Senator Darrell Steinberg February 21, 2007. Approved by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger September 30, 2008. Available at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov
71. Transportation Research Board. (2009). Driving and the built environment: The effects of compact development on motorized travel, energy use and CO2 emissions. Washington, DC: Author.
72. U.S. Department of Transportation. (2010). Transportation's role in reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions [report to Congress]. Washington, DC: Author.
73. U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce. (2008). Climate change legislation design white paper: Appropriate roles for different levels of government. Washington, DC: Author.
74. Wachs, M. (2004). Reflections on the planning process. In S. Hanson & G. Giuliano (Eds.), The geography of urban transportation (pp. 141-162). New York, NY: Guilford.
75. Wheeler, S. M. (2008). State and municipal climate change plans. Journal of the American Planning Association, 74(4), 481-496.
76. Wiener, J. B. (2006). Think globally, act globally: The limits of local climate policies. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 155(6), 1961.