Post by bluelineshawn on Nov 12, 2011 8:58:57 GMT -8
October 2011 Planning and Programming Board Board Memo
In a nutshell Metro recognizes that local regulations often work against building TOD due to a variety of reasons. (Editorial: For example zoning may limit size, require excessive parking or the entire process may be so complex that it takes years to approve). To address this Metro has funding (amount?) that will be distributed to cities that work to change existing regulations, streamline the approval process, or alternatively to perform environmental studies for potential projects. The scope will be limited to Expo (1 and 2), Foothill (2A), and Crenshaw/LAX, but may be expanded to existing lines if additional funding is found.
The priority for receiving funding will primarily be for cities that make the most significant changes to existing regulations or that streamline the existing approval process. What they are hoping is that cities allow for the creation of "transit villages" near rail stations that allow for much more dense development than might otherwise be allowed.
I think that this is great, but has it really been funding that has been holding this back or community opposition to high density development? And allowing for the funding of environmental studies sounds like it may have been designed to funnel money to LA because iinm LA already allows transit villages in principle and already has started streamlining the approval process. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
In a nutshell Metro recognizes that local regulations often work against building TOD due to a variety of reasons. (Editorial: For example zoning may limit size, require excessive parking or the entire process may be so complex that it takes years to approve). To address this Metro has funding (amount?) that will be distributed to cities that work to change existing regulations, streamline the approval process, or alternatively to perform environmental studies for potential projects. The scope will be limited to Expo (1 and 2), Foothill (2A), and Crenshaw/LAX, but may be expanded to existing lines if additional funding is found.
The priority for receiving funding will primarily be for cities that make the most significant changes to existing regulations or that streamline the existing approval process. What they are hoping is that cities allow for the creation of "transit villages" near rail stations that allow for much more dense development than might otherwise be allowed.
I think that this is great, but has it really been funding that has been holding this back or community opposition to high density development? And allowing for the funding of environmental studies sounds like it may have been designed to funnel money to LA because iinm LA already allows transit villages in principle and already has started streamlining the approval process. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.