A bill that is working its way through the California legislature may serve as a model for connecting land use and transportation here in the Tri-State area. The bill, SB 375, requires regional planning agencies to include a sustainability analysis, or “sustainable communities strategies,” in all regional transportation plans and provides incentives for towns and developers to create projects that conform with the strategies.

It has become conventional wisdom that transportation and land use must be linked in order to control sprawling development and lower vehicle miles traveled (VMT). States have begun to make this connection, most notably New Jersey when they created the NJ FIT program which directs resources to towns willing to solve congestion through coordinated zoning, planning, and transportation strategies. Recently, New York State Department of Transportation created the Smart Planning Program to assist local agencies in planning for smart growth. In addition, former Governor Spitzer created the Smart Growth Cabinet, which brings several state agencies together to pursue smart growth policies and projects. In CT, the state recently allocated $5 million per year to a two year pilot transit oriented development program.

These programs represent progress, yet a shortfall in each is that they treat smart growth and transit oriented development as separate programs rather than as a statewide policy. The difficulty generally lies in structure of our governance that puts most land use decisions in the hands of local entities, thus binding the hands of state agencies to implement smart growth planning. This is precisely the problem that SB 375 seeks to remedy.

Briefly, the legislation requires regional planning authorities to adopt “preferred growth scenarios” (PGS) to achieve a reduction in VMT in order to meet greenhouse goals set out in earlier legislation. The bill establishes the criteria for formulating the PGS and offers streamlined environmental review for qualifying projects. In addition, and perhaps most importantly, transportation money will be prioritized to those municipalities and regions that have adopted the requirements.

This type of legislation could help remedy the current piecemeal approach to smart growth. Of course, work will be needed to fit the language to each state’s unique funding and governance structure and some political savvy may be required to overcome fears of power shifts to the state from localities. Here again, lessons can be learned from CA’s experience in reaching a compromise with their League of Cities.

Of course, legislation alone, no matter how well-crafted and intended, is not a panacea. Local capitols are littered with good legislation that languishes from lack of enforcement, funding constraints and loss of political will. A good bill setting out state growth goals and incentives needs to be accompanied by institutional change in the agencies that oversee the programs. This requires not only the vision of department heads and commissioners, but a shift in training and focus for many planners and engineers who may be used to a “highway first” mode of thinking. Still, SB 375 could provide the legislative framework to push these reforms along, and help keep them in place even as political forces shift.

Update 9/2: The bill has been passed by both houses of the California legislature and will go to Gov. Schwarzenegger to sign.